Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

Discussion in '2003 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra' started by 84 BigBlock Vette, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Seansvette, you have some good points, but you continue to dog the SOHC even though you know precious little about it. The SOHC V8 is one of the most tuneable engines out there with argueably the best aftermarket support. They respond very well to forced induction as opposed to the LS1.

    New GTs are faster because of their more aggressive cams and higher flow heads. For $1100 you can convert a 96-98 GT with heads/intake/cams from a 99-2003 GT, and have more power due to higher CR at 10.5:1. $1100 worth 50 rwhp. Ported $1600 worth 60-80rwhp. Now I'm getting ported 2001 heads, modmax regrind cams, headers, and exhaust. People with similar setup net 13.0-13.4s proven. Ones that can hook reach 12s easy. Not bad for such a weak car and no tuneability.
  2. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Another thing. Can you tell me another car that can go 0-60 in 5.4 seconds and the quarter in 13.7 or even 14 flat if you want to use a major publication for $22,000? The WRX is freely admitted one of the best performance deals around and it costs 25k. The new 350z costs somewhere around 26-28k and came out 4 years later. They both have the same performance as the GT and they are widely considered great performance deals. Sure you can be confident that a stock GT can't touch you in your corvette. But you would be surprised how easy and cheap it is to make a 'lowly' gt faster. For its price it is damn fast. There isn't one car that can touch it.
  3. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    There's a couple areas that I disagree with you.

    1: Perhaps one Mustang focused magazine managed to get 13.7 in a stock GT, but reality and just about every other review gets very low 14s. I'm sure under perfect conditions, a very strong stock GT, and a pro driver with a perfect run could make 13.7. But in my opinion that doesn't make the Mustang GT a 13.7 second car. Anything below 14.0 seconds on a completely stock GT would be rare, or very difficult at best. I say the same thing to Chevy guys that claim the stock Camaro SS runs high 12s.

    2: The LS1 engine responds extremely well to a supercharger. Better than the 4.6 SOHC, but not as well as the 4.6 DOHC.

    3: In my opinion the 4.6 GT is not very tunable with standard bolt on mods. I do agree that there is tons of aftermarket support out there. But in reality it's much cheaper to being an F-Body into the 12s than a Mustang GT.

    Look I'm not saying the Mustang GT is a bad car. I'm just saying I expect more from one of the cars that pioneered hotrodding.
  4. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    1. 13.7 to 13.9 is not at all as rare for a stock GT. You are right, 13.7 is not the norm, most do run 13.9-14.0 stock. You have no idea obviously but it does not take a pro-driver, perfect conditions, and a strong factory car to run 13s. Disagree all you want, it doesn’t change what the real performance of the car is.

    2. The LS1 do not take forced induction as well as the 4.6. It’s a fact. If you want a rod through your hood supercharge the ls1, how long do you think a car with 10.2:1 compression ratio will last with say 8psi?

    3. I don’t know what you consider good for aftermarket but there just isn’t a comparison. To buy the same parts for a camaro WILL be as or more expensive and far less choices and far less research put into each product.
  5. #30 SeansVette, Aug 20, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    You are correct that the LS1 can't has quite as much pressure as the 4.6 SOCH. But it does very well with that pressure. Allow me to show you...
    2001 Mustang GT
    364 horsepower, 371 ft/lbs
    2001-2002 F-body
    418 horsepower, 414 ft/lbs
    C5 Corvette
    540 horsepower

    It is agreed that the total net gain is higher on the GT than the F-body. But the F-body does do very well even though they run slightly less boost than the Mustang. And the net result is more power from the F-body simply because you have a more powerful starting point. Also the F-body responds much better to aftermarket N/A breathing such as exhaust, headers, cold air intake, air manifold, etc. With an LS1 you can get some really nice gains from doing the cheap stuff. Headers on a GT aren't worth the bloody knuckles, and when I put a Bassani X-pipe on my 01 Saleen (now standard in the 02) it felt like I actually lost low-end torque.

    Just look at the N/A Saleen S281. On their website they advertise 14.1 in the 1/4 mile, with Exhaust, X-pipe, underdrive pulley, and Saleen Powerflash. MMFF got 13.99 in one, and almost all members on the official Saleen message board will authenticate it's accuracy.

    Yes, the 4.6 SOHC is a tunable engine. But to get really nice numbers you have to really put some work into them. I bought my Vortex Cold Air intake for my LS1 for about 200 bucks, and I got some very noticable power gains out of it. I've never dynoed my car so I can't give you any horsepower figures.

    Hey, if you have a 4.6 GT I'm not dogging your car. I've seen some very nice ones put together such as the Stage III Roush, Saleen S281-E, and many others.
    What I am saying is I hold my expectations of Mustang higher. If they're only going to have the power out-put of 260 horsepower (it was 225 not too long ago), they damn well better keep the tuning ability of the 5.0 Mustang. The 5.0 had horsepower begging to come out. It's almost like they built a 350 horsepower engine, then detuned the hell out of it on purpose. I never understood that.

    Believe it or not I'm also a Mustang fan, and I'm not the only fan who feels this way.
  6. #31 Heyman, Aug 20, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    As far as comparing the z28 to the GT, which according to vortech makes 398rwhp/403tq (no ram-air). We'll leave the SS out of this. So it had gains of 88/63. The GT had gains of 104/69. The GT gained more than the camaro. You also compared a $4600 vortech for the camaro to the mustangs $3500. For the GT, the $4600 vortech brings power up to 402hp/400tq. which is a gain of 142/98.

    So for the same price ($4600 vortech superchargers) they make almost identical power and the mustang started in the whole 50 horses and 30 ft lbs. Simply put the GT responds better to forced induction than the LS1 and blown, is more reliable. The GT has more potential with a power adder sc/turbo, and the camaro has more potential NA.

    As far as NA mods, headers will net around 15-20 horsepower and ft lb, an x-pipe won't see a big increase in peak or low-end but will see good gains 3500-6000RPMs, gains can be seen on the track around .2 and 2mph. Gains from CAIs aren't that much anyways.

    For the 225 horsepower GTs, look above. Very tuneable. And btw no stock 5.0 had more power than that (besides 94 and 95 cobras).
  7. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    As far as the 1/4 the GT IS a 13 second car. Either MT, C&D, or R&T (can't remember) got a 13.9, the other got a 14.0. MM&FF got a 13.7. PEOPLE get 13s. Sorry.
  8. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    We can go back and forth all day long. I already agreed that the net power gains from a 4.6 SOHC is higher from a supercharger. BUT, most owners don't supercharge their engines, and a supercharged F-body will still beat a supercharged GT (assuming they both use standard 8-9 PSI superchargers from the same manufacturer). The cheap bolt on mods provide MUCH better gains from an LS1, especially mods that involve air intake or exhaust. The vast majority of owners out there only do the basic cheap stuff.

    MOST reviews only show the 4.6 Mustang GT doing low 14s. The N/A Saleen S281 generally does 14 seconds flat. Saleen claims that on their website, other owners have validated it, and MM&FF had a best time of 13.99. Remember, that's with Saleen underdrive pulley, Borla Exhaust, K&N Air Filter, Saleen powerflash, 18" wheels with Pirelli tires, and I'm pretty sure 3.55 rear differential (most of them have that option).

    I guess it all comes down to this. If you ignore who makes what, I would much rather have Chevy's LS1 than Ford's 4.6 SOHC. Still, I would rather have Ford's 4.6 DOHC than Chevy's LS1. I test drove a stock Mustang GT right after I tested a Camaro SS, and MAN you really feel the difference. I didn't test a Z28 so I guess it technically wasn't apples and oranges.
  9. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Just a note seansvette, why did you show stats with vortechs in the fords and the better procharger in the vette, i'd like to see the prochargers numbers on the mustang and if you do post it dont just show the lowest boost as you most likely showed the highest boost on the vette
  10. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Go back and read. I posted Vortech stats for BOTH the Mustang and the F-body. I only used the Procharger stats for the Vette because Vortech posts nothing for the C5 Corvette. Also, 540 horsepower was the LOWEST standard boost which was about 8 PSI. If you click the link I provided instead of making assumptions you would have seen it's upgradeable to 750 horsepower.

    The Camaro SS reacts better than the Z28 to a supercharger, and the C5 Corvette reacts better than the Camaro SS. Camaros have detuned Corvette engines under the hood. This is why they become so strong when you open them up and let them to breathe.

    The Z28 has shabby interior and a poor view of the road, but (in my opinion) it has a much better power plant. What you have is a 350 horsepower, 375 ft/lbs Corvette engine that has been de-tuned to 310 horsepower, 340 ft/lbs.
  11. #36 jsscr2000, Aug 21, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    a ta ta ta.

    I asked you to post the procharger stats on the mustang merely becasue i knew it would provide better numbers then what the vortechs put out. oh and here's pro charger's link comparing their product to vortech (on a 5.0) the exact reason i knew the procharger was better. why bother comparing two different superchargers????

    and your link also says that while obtaining that 540 hp and i qoute a "Super Chips Micro Tuner and eight 38 lb/hr fuel injectors" needed to be installed. I think there is more going on here then you like to admit; for gods sake i could start throwing in "For example, the ProCharger 14 psi 5.0 Mustang system is backed by a one year warranty" ( 2nd to last line) and drop stats on that but we are getting off topic. All i ever wanted to say was:
    1- show the procharger for an even comparison
    2- using different superchargers to make a comparison was although well intentioned not the best idea. Try not to get fired up
  12. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Again, I DID provide same model examples. Vortech F-body and Vortech Mustang GT superchargers. The larger fuel injectors and other accesories accompany just about ANY supercharger. Take a look at the parts list for the Vortech blowers.

    Weather or not Vortech or Procharger is better depends on who you talk to. Notice that in your link Procharger compares stats of an intercooled procharger vs Vortech without aftercooler.

    I'm not going to argue which one is better (Vortech or Procharger) because it doesn't matter.
  13. #38 Heyman, Aug 21, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Ok, you say a supercharged z28 will beat a supercharged GT with a standard 8-9psi. Well, is that before or after you changed out the pistons to deal with the compression ratio? On your link, I show you that when spending the same money they make exactly the same power. That’s with the GT down by 50 hp and 30 ft lbs stock. The mustang gains 54 more horsepower and 35 ft lb more than the camaro with the same setup. Now think about this. A sc’ed GT which weighs 300 lb less and we all know hooks better will beat the sc'ed z28. Give credit when credit is due. Mustangs, whether 2v GTs or 4v cobra’s respond MUCH better to forced induction than camaros.

    A supercharged GT with a centrifugal supercharger, fuel injectors, intercooler, tb, and a tune produce a proven and reliable 400+ horses at the wheels for about the same price as buying a new z28 and a couple bolt-ons (assuming you could still buy one). Think about it. And think about why there are so many blown mustangs and so many heads and cams camaros.

    I’ve seen reviews for z28SS’s that have gotten 13.8. Does that mean it’s a high 13 second car? There are too many conditions and variables with one run on one day for that Saleen to make some general opinion. Why don’t you go to or and ask how many in stock form get 13s. You will be surprised despite whatever bad experiences you’ve had with ford and how a 20k GT doesn’t stack up to some 30k z28SS you test drove…
  14. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    In one sense you're right. I did not look at, or factor in the cost difference between the superchargers. I was surprised to see how much more the LS1 blower costs.

    However, with equal superchargers the LS1 still performs better. But you are right that the price difference is rather large. The LS1 still performs better in stock form, and it still reacts much better to cheaper mods. Remember, the Z28 powertrain is nothing less than a restricted Corvette engine.

    You do bring up some very good point for the 2 Valve GT. The LS1 is just my cup of tea. If I were going to throw several thousand dollars towards modifications, I might do some research and reconsider.

    By the way, any idea which engine would bennefit more from Heads and Cam work? My mechanic did those on some guy's silver C5 Vette and got 450 RWHP. He also had some other minor bolt-on mods.
  15. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    I think that with the same money thrown at each [even ignoring the fact that the z28 costs more], the supercharged GT will win, but this is something that we cannot seem to agree on. As far as heads and cams for camaros, the number I see thrown out there the most is 400RWHP on a z28SS. The LS1 responds much better to heads and cams because there aren’t any packages out there for our 4.6. Performance heads are costly and no one really has a good package because a chip and tune is necessary because of the EEC. We have a lot of support for cams, modmax and crane come to mind, and the most common thing to do is to port and polish the stock heads with aggressive cams. Overall, the LS1s seem to benefit a little more from this treatment especially because of their high compression ratio, and the 4.6 benefits more from forced induction.
  16. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    this thing will whoop your c5 corvette and it costs about 35k compared to your 45k vette.
  17. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    You are complete idiot. First of all, I have never bashed the 2003 Cobra or even the 2001. I'm a fan of both cars and if you bothered to look at my signature you would have seen that.

    Second, there are some advantages to BOTH cars so it all comes down to personal preference.

    Third, unless YOU own a 2003 Cobra your comment is on the level of "my daddy can beat up your daddy"

  18. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    SeansVette shows his intelligent mind off again with this dispute. People comparing the Z06 vs 03 Corba aren't really saying much. The Cobra can hang with the Z06 for alittle bit but the Z06 will pull away. I read somewhere on other forums that a guy in a Dodge Viper(dunno what year or model) got beaten by a 03 Cobra(stock I'm not sure but probly not). But still people bash Ford for using the supercharger for more HP. They miss the point that they were aiming at LOW cost but with Some extra power than the former Cobras. Also SeansVette pointed out people not joking on Porshe for their Twin Turbos on the 911. But then just then back to their "base" 911 nonturbo pushing 320hp out of a H6. The price difference of course is BIG. But Porshe is a very good company and produces VERY nice cars for the cash u must pay.
  19. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    I like the new ford mustang cobras alot. they are very nice cars. but they were not made to compete with the Corvette Z06. now if the person who started this wants a car that can compete with the corvette Z06 i sugest they wait for the Ford GT-40 to come and make the corvette look like a little girl. so if you are trying to compare the new mustang Cobras with the corvette Z06 you should be comparing the Z06 with the GT-40 which will come out soon.
  20. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    None of them are comparible. The Z06 costs at least $10,000 more thant the Cobra on average, and the GT40 has a target price of about $100,000. You should be comparing the GT40 to more expensive cars out there such as the Ferrari Modena or even the Lamborghini Diable. That's where I think it will shine. But we'll have to wait and see.
  21. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Of course you dumbasses don't complain when Porsche, Ferrari, Nissan, or Toyota, among other companies, use forced induction. Only when Ford uses it you have stupid comments like "The only way it is fast is with a supercharger". It's making good power, who cares how it gets it? Stop whining or cease existing.
  22. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Yeah I used to give guys shit about how this new Cobra needs a SuperCharger to get it to move. But hey, eventually I'm gonna get a Charger in my IROC so people give it a break already, quit complaining this car is fast. Although I do have to say stang boys, I saw one at the tracks a few weeks ago the MotherFucker ran a 13.7 and I almost wanted to throw him outta the car and show him how it's done. People like that don't deserve to drive this car. They need to stick to there Neons with cold air intakes and phart pipes. Cars that don't have power!!!!
  23. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    damn what was he guy stock in the first gear or something.
  24. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    A 13.7? You should have pulled him out and gave it a shot.
  25. Re: Stang needs a charger! HAHAHA!

    Did he leave the e-brake up throught the first two gears? lol.

Share This Page