what does it take to beat mustang gt

[Gro Harlem]

Those computer programs are so far off. I ran a 14.8 with my "GSR" with no mods, stock intake and exhaust, K8 manifold and ZE ecu. Without the mani, i was probably losing 10whp at least.

[wyldside]

I'll admit that this program does kinda suck when it comes to shifting speed. I wish I could fix that. It is pretty good for comparing cars against eachother because the shift speeds for both vehicles are the same, therefore keeping the type of driver the same. I have no doubt in my mind that you can get the car to accelerate faster just by being a better driver. Even when I put my car into the tester with exact specs, I know I can accelerate faster than what it says.

[TsiMiata]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is a LOT more that goes into racing than power to weight ratio. AND, also, the efficiency of the drivetrain will change the HP-gained-per-LB-lost calculation. The 1HP/100lb was probably an average. Curt also brought up a very good point. In a drag race, reaction time is very important. Just because your car is faster, doesn't mean that you win the race. Driver ability is key. BUT, there is no way in hell a stock MX3 is going to beat a Z4 in any kind of race unless the Z4 is driven by a 11yr old girl. (Yes I am implying that women can't drive )
But like I said before, it's going to be hard to beat a Mustang GT without some serious power adding. I'd go as far as to say, it's almost pointless without boost. (unless you want to spend $15000 building the N/A engine) If anyone CAN beat a 98 GT without boost, I want a video, and a list of mods for proof. I'm not buying the whole 'KLZE with exhaust, intake, and pully's' BS...sorry.

Also, I appologize, it was -50lbs/+1HP.[/QB]

Forget drivers, reactions times etc... This all has to be done assuming that both cars will have identical drivers with identical reaction times, identical shift times etc. I could beat a viper with a stock festiva if he had narcolepsy and fell asleep at the light for 15 or so seconds.

You didn't burst any bubbles. Power to weight ratio is as accurate way as any to "bench" race two cars. Go look up some 1/4 mile times, Hp and weights of different cars and see if you can prove me wrong. 90%+ of the time the car with the lower to power to weight ratio will be faster.

[stang67fb]

but btw when i ran my friend you gotta take into hand that my ZE isnt running all that great like it was first hand also i dont have the ZE ecu so....other than that i got around 200lbs of audio equipment in the back and he took off first (cause he sucks at racing)so actually without all that weight and the ZE ecu in i think he wouldnt of beat me by no more than 1 car if that.I think a fairly unmodded MX can pull a GT. definately a ZE + 50shot, but who cares...your goal should be to pull a TA or SS,well atleast thats mine(my old friend has a 02 TA that i just have to be ahead of one of these days).

[killerpickle]

my butt dyno tells me that one 220 lb person in the passenger seat makes a hell of a lot more difference than 4.5 hp. Though i must admit that its not really a good way of comparing. Since you dont lose ANY hp. Just relative hp from the extra weight. And I also believe it is exponential. If you try and pull a 5000 lb trailer see what happens. By the math thats oh...100 hp. So you should still have 100 hp (with a ze) so it will move as fast as a 93 4 banger right? Nope. See my problem?

[TsiMiata]

Check your math. The power to weight says that trailer costs you 144hp & the passenger costs you 16hp. thats all asuming a 2500lb car with the driver and a 200hp ZE.

Then there is the whole problem of the MX-3 tearing in half trying to pull it. :p

[killerpickle]

okay, your right I forgot the car. But my point still remains. It is not as simple as 50 lbs equals 1 hp. That is wrong wrong dead wrong. Not even an estimation. I believe as you get heavier it increases exponentialy (not to sound repetive...).

[VizualXTC]

If you try and pull a 5000 lb trailer see what happens. By the math thats oh...100 hp. So you should still have 100 hp (with a ze) so it will move as fast as a 93 4 banger right?

That honestly has to be the stupidest assimilation I have EVER heard. That isn't taking into account the traction problems, or the weight placement. That's like saying that, since I can run 15mph weighing 160lbs, that if I was carying a 90lb bag of cement in my arms, I could run 7.5mph. It aint happening.

{quote]Forget drivers, reactions times etc... This all has to be done assuming that both cars will have identical drivers with identical reaction times, identical shift times etc. I could beat a viper with a stock festiva if he had narcolepsy and fell asleep at the light for 15 or so seconds.[/quote]

I don't remember EVER seeing a street/strip race between 2 cars with identical drivers, reaction times, shift times, etc. The topic was 'what does it take to beat mustang gt' Not, in a theoretically perfect race, what car would win. AND like I said, power to weight is a good guideline, but I would NEVER bet on a race dependent on it (unless it's as unevenly matched as a GT vs. GS) because too many other factors are involved.

I think a fairly unmodded MX can pull a GT. definately a ZE + 50shot, but who cares

N2O is FI (Forced Induction). That would be boost. Maybe not in the traditional context, but force adding air into the cylinder is boost.

It is not as simple as 50 lbs equals 1 hp. That is wrong wrong dead wrong. Not even an estimation.

Tell Vaughn that, not me. It was a simple point put in to give your side a little bit more credebility, but since we can't agree on it. Let's all say that the GT loses 20HP from the weight. Let's still say that the drivetrain loses an extra 10HP. So with a KLZE the GT is down 10HP on a well tuned ZE. (remember, a ZE in america will rarely make the claimed 200HP without tuning because of the difference in gas octane and other factors) That still doesn't make up for the 100ft/lb lack of TQ the ZE possesses. Remember, HORSEPOWER IS NOT EVERYRHING. The torque is what gets you off the line. The TORQUE is what gets the engine to rev faster. Faster rev's means quicker shifts and quicker acceleration. See, in theory, The extra 100TQ will get the GT to 6000RPM let's say 1 second before the MX-3. The GT has max HP at 4750 and the GS has max HP at 6500. So when the GS hits it's max HP the GT has already shifted into 2nd and is on it's way to it's peak HP. Thats why the torque plays a big role in races.

Like I said before, if you beat the GT with your modestly modified GS, I want video and a list of mods. Otherwise I will claim I beat a Murcielago in my ex's ford tempo. I want proof that you guy beat these GT mustangs with your GS, and not a '90 LX hatch. Proof is very good.

[mitmaks]

Originally posted by tcsnipe:
Ok what do you think I need to beat a Mustang gt 95-98? Right now I have an intake and short shifter. What else do you think I need? Dont say get a klze. If I put all the bolt ons would I have a chance? This is with a mx-3 gs.

a '68 R/T with 440
http://www.cardomain.com/id/mitmaks

[killerpickle]

ouch. Im not trying to start anything. I just have a strong view and have had many an argument about the effects of weight reduction or adding weight. I would really like to know how much my 60 lbs of stereo equipment, spare tire, 10 lbs of cleaning supplies and snow brush take away from the power of my engine

[andy]

tcsnipe: you didn't mention if its an auto or manual?. Against the manual, no amount of bolt-ons will get you there. Against the auto, maybe with all the bolt-ons. every car seems to take to bolt-ons differently, some better than others.
Skip the exhaust cutout and just put a free flowing exhaust with a TP,resonator,and your choice of loud mufflers.
Now add to your list, phenolics with the TB bypass. lightened Flywheel and performance cluthch,moderate weight removal,lighter tire and rim combo,alot of practice on a recently tuned motor and you still come up short of the 5 spd.
You could always pray they miss a shift.

With my current list of mods I am still 1/2 car length behind a auto gt up to 80mph.

Andy P. 93 GS

[Sonicxtacy02]

TB bypass wont do anything for him.. just cause idle probs. It works where ya dont have winters :p

[andy]

south Floridian here. I would agree with you on that. TB bypass is a pita in colder climates.
A recent visit to atlanta proved that. With Phenolics and bypass the whole intake track right up to the heads would stay cold until I parked the car. Idle would fluctuate up and down.
If it did that here at home I would have to undo it or come up with a better solution.
Andy P 93 GS

[xXx_OTEP_xXx]

why do you set such high goals?? start small.. try beating other 4-cyl and v6 cars that are pretty quick.. celicas, integra gsr, etc.. then move up to v8's if you think you can.. but jumping right to Stang GT's, T/A, SS camaro.. why? i dont get it..