Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-29-2007, 02:11 AM   #16
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
For what it's worth, Evan Smith is a professional driver who can make anything run faster than anybody else. I NEVER said that a stock 2v 4.6 could do that...but then again there was only a few professional drivers running those uber-high 12's in perfect conditions. I live 15 minutes from Atco raceway and am there quite often...I have yet to see ANY stock LS1 run a time like that...neither have any of my friends who are also at the track frequently.

With average drivers in both vehicles, they are very close. As a matter of fact, I've seen LS1 powered 6-speed T/A's run 12.60 once...he had slicks and full exhaust and God knows what else...the rest of the night he ran in the low 13's...it was a 60* night and there were no traction issues. Some of these magazines receive "ringers" from the factory...ringers meaning, cars that run faster than the production models.

I believe it was Justin Burcham, owner of JPC, who ran a "pre-production" Mach 1 to 12.90's. The production models ran close but 13.10's was about as good as it got. Anybody can run anything and claim it to be "stock", that's my point here. And we're not even on topic anymore...I think you really wanted to start a debate instead of actually receive information about the 4.6. A centrifugally supercharged 2v 4.6 should make more than 335rwhp, unless it's completely stock, untuned, and equipped with an automatic trans...so something was wrong with that combo.

Don't let one car, with a less than optimum tune/setup, turn you away...they are quick cars and very fun to drive...and speed parts are cheaper than they are for GM's...not to mention easier to work on.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 05:24 AM   #17
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Uhm no I was hoping omeone could change my mind or tell me something I didnt know but I highly doubt parts are cheaper. You ever cammed a 4.6. Trust me it expensive a pain in the ass and definetly not worth it. Ever cammed a SBC? Easy as Pie.

Ever put longtube headers on a SN95-2 Complete pain in the ass. Why do you think most mach 1 guys dont go LT, because its a complete pain in the ass. They just justofy it by saing the stock manifolds are good to 600hp and LTs arent much better than Shorties, which is complete BS.

Man down here in texas we must have better air or something cause youve got some slow guys up there. My first time ever at the track with only Gears, CAI, and LTS. No tune and the car ran like shit. Plus I had a tranny shittin out. I managed a 13.3. FIRST TIME EVER in this car.

There is a guy on tech who put his LT1 into the 12s with just headers, CAI, and a tune ONLY. his name is urbanhunter44. Look him up.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2007, 10:03 PM   #18
giant016
My mom says I'm cool
 
giant016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 1,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
And just so you know the 99s werent even the best performing LS1, they were still sporting the LS1 intake (not the LS6 as 2000 and up were) also the 99s mayb have still had the heavier metal gas tank.

Lets see a stock N/A 4.6 do that.
I'm with you overall, but for some reason most of the stock 12 second F-bodies I've heard of are 98-00s. IIRC the cam is slighty different, even though the 00-02s regularly dyno higher.
__________________
Submitted for the approval of the Midnight Society

giant016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 02:12 AM   #19
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
That reminds me of an interesting conversation.

Whats your views on the bigger is better (with cams) mindet everyone moddin an LS1 has lately.

On a stock cube car stay under a 230 230 duration is usually my rule of thumb, maybe slightly bigger.

The smaller cams usually dyno less, but Ive seen alot of Trex guys get taken down by more mild cams.

Plus a smaller cam with lots of mid range would be much better for roll racing, conidering shorter gears wouldnt be required.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 04:25 AM   #20
giant016
My mom says I'm cool
 
giant016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 1,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
That reminds me of an interesting conversation.

Whats your views on the bigger is better (with cams) mindet everyone moddin an LS1 has lately.

On a stock cube car stay under a 230 230 duration is usually my rule of thumb, maybe slightly bigger.

The smaller cams usually dyno less, but Ive seen alot of Trex guys get taken down by more mild cams.

Plus a smaller cam with lots of mid range would be much better for roll racing, conidering shorter gears wouldnt be required.
I think it's just like the giant single-turbo Supra guys that have 1000+hp but still run crappy ETs at the track for their HP. They want to be able to say they have X amount of HP, even if it means sacrificing a nice torque curve. You're average non-car person will be more impressed if you tell them that your car has 500HP versus telling them your car runs 9s in the 1/4.

I don't know much about cam sizes as don't have the money to do the job right (new rear, built up tranny, dyno tune, and might as well throw on some heads) and can't really give you my rule of thumb. I'm just saying I'd go for whatever gives the fastest ETs but can be street driven practicaly.
__________________
Submitted for the approval of the Midnight Society

giant016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 09:44 PM   #21
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
A 4.6, whether it's a 2v or 4v, can still make big power on stock cams...no sense in camming one(especially a 4v) until your eclipsing the 400rwhp mark. As for the header install, no it's not that bad...raise the engine, pull the steering shaft and you're in business...most people think you have to drop the K-member, but you don't.

The stock manifolds are not good to 600hp...you are correct in that.

As far as cam duration, LSA's, and lift number...that will all depend on the engine combo. You can have two cams, one with more duration, one with more lift and they will operate equally in a specific rpm range. One thing I know for a fact is that LS1/LS6 cars run hard with a cam.

Oh, I almost forgot...we have to compare the factory supercharged '03/'04 Cobra's to your LS1...can your stone stock LS1's run 12.60's? I didn't think so. Are you aware of the roll-bar requirement dropping from 11.99 to 11.49? That happened shortly after the '03 Cobra hit the streets...a pulley/tune/gears and you had a low 12/high 11 second daily driver.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 11:49 PM   #22
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
A 4.6, whether it's a 2v or 4v, can still make big power on stock cams...no sense in camming one(especially a 4v) until your eclipsing the 400rwhp mark. As for the header install, no it's not that bad...raise the engine, pull the steering shaft and you're in business...most people think you have to drop the K-member, but you don't.

The stock manifolds are not good to 600hp...you are correct in that.

As far as cam duration, LSA's, and lift number...that will all depend on the engine combo. You can have two cams, one with more duration, one with more lift and they will operate equally in a specific rpm range. One thing I know for a fact is that LS1/LS6 cars run hard with a cam.

Oh, I almost forgot...we have to compare the factory supercharged '03/'04 Cobra's to your LS1...can your stone stock LS1's run 12.60's? I didn't think so. Are you aware of the roll-bar requirement dropping from 11.99 to 11.49? That happened shortly after the '03 Cobra hit the streets...a pulley/tune/gears and you had a low 12/high 11 second daily driver.
An LSx sure can do 12.60 bone stock ever heard of a Vette. You want to jump up a notch then I will to. And if you read carefully in the first post I said excluding the terminator motor.

It may have been cosworth that said turbochargers (boost) were made for people who cant build engines.

I was refering to a stock cube stock headed LS1 car. Much over 230/230 you make more HP but alot of times the giant cammed guys are being outran by more mild cam guys. Some of the mild cam cars are in the 11s.
I know a bunch of Trex cars that dyno like 440rwhp CAM only and cant ET worth a damn.
__________________

Last edited by Enthusiast : 07-30-2007 at 11:59 PM.
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 11:56 PM   #23
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
And if you read carefully in the first post I said excluding the mod motor.




All 4.6/5.4 engines regardless of number of cams are "mod" motors.

The Eaton supercharger makes up the deficit in cubic inches, that's all. This is what I was trying to explain to you earlier in the thread...you are comparing apples to oranges when you discuss the power production/performance differences in these cars...they do not match up equally...yet you continue to argue the fact...or course, you're GM's have a power advantage over the little N/A 2v 4.6....but when the power swings the other way you want nothing to do with it?

Go figure!
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 12:04 AM   #24
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Sorry that wa supposed to say terminator motor, and the first pot does say that.

And I want refering to the Terminator motor cause I know it has great potential straight fromt he factory cause it comes with a motor prepped for boost and a power adder, most cars like that do have good potential.
Uh 2jz
rb26dett
lsj
5.4 lightning motor
Pretty much any deisel
SRT-4s
Turbo Mopars
Turbo Porsche Flat 6s (guys are seeing 550whp from turbo swaps)
etc

But still for your terminators we have our vettes.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 12:25 AM   #25
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
And for your 'Vettes, we have our GT500's...and for your Z06's, we have our 550hp GT's....Game, Set, and Match...Ford wins.

Back to the topic, the 4.6 is a very good engine, especially in terms of durability/longevity...I've seen them run over 250k miles with oil changes done every 15k miles, at best...and still perform well.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 10:59 AM   #26
kurt
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2
Ford..of course its good..its famous for its high quality performance..it can have better performance if upgraded with an Iceman Performance Part..this cools up the engine, causing it to run in a very fair performance...
kurt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 06:54 PM   #27
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
And for your 'Vettes, we have our GT500's...and for your Z06's, we have our 550hp GT's....Game, Set, and Match...Ford wins.

Back to the topic, the 4.6 is a very good engine, especially in terms of durability/longevity...I've seen them run over 250k miles with oil changes done every 15k miles, at best...and still perform well.

Haha well dont forget the GT barely outperforms the Z06 for twice as much. And for your GT we have our soon to be released ~650HP Z07 or BlueDevil or Corvette SS, Which will be FI, so it will have a great aftermarket and power potential.

Game, Set, Match. GM Wins.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 08:55 PM   #28
Sick88Tbird
Master of the Fox-chassis
 
Sick88Tbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sicklerville, NJ
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
Haha well dont forget the GT barely outperforms the Z06 for twice as much. And for your GT we have our soon to be released ~650HP Z07 or BlueDevil or Corvette SS, Which will be FI, so it will have a great aftermarket and power potential.

Game, Set, Match. GM Wins.

Have any of those vehicles been released yet? No, so GM doesn't win. The Ford GT runs low-11's on street tires and handles like it's on rails, the Z06 doesn't outperform in any fashion. Sorry buddy, sometimes you have to face the facts. Good job on trolling though.
__________________
New Toy- Stone stock '88 T-bird Sport in need of some TLC

1988 Cougar XR-7- HO/T-5 conversion, cracked block prevented from reaching full potential.

RIP '88 T-Bird....14.1@98.7mph...best sleeper in So. Jersey, now it's taking a permanent dirt nap.
Sick88Tbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 09:14 PM   #29
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sick88Tbird
And for your 'Vettes, we have our GT500's...and for your Z06's, we have our 550hp GT's....Game, Set, and Match...Ford wins.

Back to the topic, the 4.6 is a very good engine, especially in terms of durability/longevity...I've seen them run over 250k miles with oil changes done every 15k miles, at best...and still perform well.

Oh I forgot to mention but your 500 hp gt500 wont outrun the base model 400 vette.

GT500s are over 4K lbs hahaahahah Way to go ford

Okay so lets say ford has it for now what are you gonna do when the new top of the line vette comes out. Admit defeat, because its inevitable, it has been approved for producion and it will be out.

Oh and I guess youve driven a GT before huh, you would know just how it handles. Ive seen a bone stock Z06 with nothing but DRs run low 11s to. The GT has a good traction advantage being mid engine, help the Z0 out a tuny bit in the traction department and all the sudden they run very much alike.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 09:23 PM   #30
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Just so you know octane magazine reported a 7:42 lap time for the GT at the Ring. I do believe everyone was blown away when it ran a 7:29. Ill try and find were I read about it. But these cars are much more equal than you think here are lap times for each one at different tracks
GT Corvette Z06
Top Gear Track 1:21.9 1:22.4
GingerMan Raceway 1:32.45 1:32.75
Hockenheim Shorttrack 1:14.1 1:11.5
Vairano testtrack 1:19.810 1:19.5
Oschersleben 1:42.84 1:40.3
Daimler-Chrysler Proving Ground 1:19.6 1:15.4
Virginia International Raceway 3:00.7 2:58.2

Also power to weight ratio is damn near identical on these cars on .01 seperates them.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.