Posts: 1176
Joined: 10/19/2003 From: martinez, ca Status: offline
LOL this is so funny. "Well if you do this we get to do that." JD1969 is rihgt. Besides we shouldnt be fighting. Both companies have done such an excelent job. We domestics need to stick together against all that damn rice. I would gladly drive an 03 slobra, or a slomaro. They are awsome cars. Argueing over the internet is just pointless.
you cant compare boosted powerplants to n/a...regardless of engine size. boosted owns all. its hard to even compare dohc to sohc. remember the old replacement/displacement thing? maybe ford should just build a bigger motor, keep the blower, and the dohc. then, and only then, can the LS1 lose.
Oh well, GM makes the more powerful engines That's been established since 93, when the LT1 just creams the poor little mustang.
Before I started getting into anything remotely close to car related. I only went by looks. I loved the way the 80's Iroc's looked, and I knew they had a V8 Also LOVED the way the 87-93 Foxes looked too. I made the choice based on basically that alone. Then I got into all this modding and crap. Love the sound they emmit, and love they way it performs.
You can make anything go fast, make it sound almost the way you want it too. It all comes down to what you just want to be caught driving I guess...?
Posts: 3989
Joined: 7/26/2004 From: St. Louis, MO Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: iwrxit
you cant compare boosted powerplants to n/a...regardless of engine size. boosted owns all. its hard to even compare dohc to sohc. remember the old replacement/displacement thing? maybe ford should just build a bigger motor, keep the blower, and the dohc. then, and only then, can the LS1 lose.
NOOOOOO!! TEH LS1 CAN NEVAR LOOOOZE!!!1!!one!!!!eleven!!
You took that way out of context, but since you brought it up. GM has a Cadillac 4.6L motor that makes 320hp N/A, that's right a 281. And, since you brought it up, GM does have an LS1 302. It makes 435hp all motor and is pushrod. Ford has the 302 cammer which makes 415 hp, I guess that's decent. Yet GM's old pushrod powerplant makes more hp. LSx > anything.
And the only part you're right on in the 2nd part of this statement is that $ for $ the Cobra is faster, that's b/c it starts out F/I. Any forced induction car is going to be easier to mod to gain more hp.
Study first, don't be blind to one car manufacturer, then try again.
Yes, I know, the Northstar is a wonderful engine, but they're not put into performance cars. So what good is that? Yes, theroretically, you could build a 4.6 NS Camaro with 3000 lbs curb weight, but this isn't a theoretical world. So, again, end of story.
(BTW, you guys (GM EMD) also make a 6000 hp diesel engine for the SD90 locomotive. So?)
Second, when we discuss engines, keep it to regular production models that Joe can easily buy and drive on the street. No need to for special crate engines and such. You don't see me talking about a 5.0 cammer crate motor in the origional post do you? Hmm, I guess you guys have 1100hp 427 Lingenfelters as well, so I guess Mustangs must suck all the way!
My point is, Ford made a 4.6 SC Cobra, really fast, and sold well. GM used to make a 5.7 NA F-body, fast, and did not sell well. Simple as that. No need to say how you could've wooped, slaughtered, roasted and ate us IF, and only IF, GM put a 25 psi twin screw on a forged titanium internals LS1. It didn't happen. And if it did, F-boies would've walked off the face of this planet a lot faster
Posts: 2412
Joined: 9/1/2003 From: Rhinelander, WI United States Status: offline
I remember reading a a Super Ford magazine or something that when the 4th gen Camaro came out, everyone thought it looked like a Geo Storm on steriods, and it does! Best part it, the Storm came out on year at least before the 4th gen maro. That's the primary reason it didn't sell well I think, styling, the Storm mentallity couldn't be broken.
Posts: 3989
Joined: 7/26/2004 From: St. Louis, MO Status: offline
The front of my car looks like a Chrysler Concorde. I saw a photoshop of a Concorde with SS badges and an SS hood and smoking rear tires and I gotta admit, it was pretty funny.
Team MF Member #420 Posts: 14383
Joined: 7/24/2003 Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 86HOGT
I remember reading a a Super Ford magazine or something that when the 4th gen Camaro came out, everyone thought it looked like a Geo Storm on steriods, and it does! Best part it, the Storm came out on year at least before the 4th gen maro. That's the primary reason it didn't sell well I think, styling, the Storm mentallity couldn't be broken.
GM's poor marketing laid grounds to the failure of the F-body. The storm had no role in it dying in 2002.
Posts: 3989
Joined: 7/26/2004 From: St. Louis, MO Status: offline
I believe another reason may be the difficulty in getting in and out of them; they have a lower, more laid-back stance than most cars. Mustangs are more traditionally upright, if that makes any sense. But yeah, when's the last time you saw a Camaro commercial? My g/f used to think they died out in the 80's; she didn't even know what a fourth gen was. After she drove mine, however, she had one of her own within a few months.
You took that way out of context, but since you brought it up. GM has a Cadillac 4.6L motor that makes 320hp N/A, that's right a 281. And, since you brought it up, GM does have an LS1 302. It makes 435hp all motor and is pushrod. Ford has the 302 cammer which makes 415 hp, I guess that's decent. Yet GM's old pushrod powerplant makes more hp. LSx > anything.
And the only part you're right on in the 2nd part of this statement is that $ for $ the Cobra is faster, that's b/c it starts out F/I. Any forced induction car is going to be easier to mod to gain more hp.
Study first, don't be blind to one car manufacturer, then try again.
Yes, I know, the Northstar is a wonderful engine, but they're not put into performance cars. So what good is that? Yes, theroretically, you could build a 4.6 NS Camaro with 3000 lbs curb weight, but this isn't a theoretical world. So, again, end of story.
(BTW, you guys (GM EMD) also make a 6000 hp diesel engine for the SD90 locomotive. So?)
Second, when we discuss engines, keep it to regular production models that Joe can easily buy and drive on the street. No need to for special crate engines and such. You don't see me talking about a 5.0 cammer crate motor in the origional post do you? Hmm, I guess you guys have 1100hp 427 Lingenfelters as well, so I guess Mustangs must suck all the way!
My point is, Ford made a 4.6 SC Cobra, really fast, and sold well. GM used to make a 5.7 NA F-body, fast, and did not sell well. Simple as that. No need to say how you could've wooped, slaughtered, roasted and ate us IF, and only IF, GM put a 25 psi twin screw on a forged titanium internals LS1. It didn't happen. And if it did, F-boies would've walked off the face of this planet a lot faster
Point is, blown Cobra > stock f-body. I never denied it. I was kidding about the viagra post....I even threw in the smiley...If they were a lot cheaper, I'd sell my LS1 and buy a blown Cobra. You're the one who took it to this level.
GM uses old pushrod motors to make tons of power for a pretty cheap price.
Bottom line is that GM engineering > Ford's. Ford's marketing > GM.
Team MF Member #420 Posts: 14383
Joined: 7/24/2003 Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: TommyV8
I believe another reason may be the difficulty in getting in and out of them; they have a lower, more laid-back stance than most cars. Mustangs are more traditionally upright, if that makes any sense. But yeah, when's the last time you saw a Camaro commercial? My g/f used to think they died out in the 80's; she didn't even know what a fourth gen was. After she drove mine, however, she had one of her own within a few months.
Yup, it's not a comfortable car for the people who aren't crazy enough to donate a kidney to own one.
Posts: 3989
Joined: 7/26/2004 From: St. Louis, MO Status: offline
Ford's engineering is not too shabby. They just built a N/A 4.6L base V8 GT that can keep up with the 5.7L LS1 for a very reasonable price. Looks good and handles well, too. Gotta give credit where credit is due.
muhahahahahah. lol, Id buy an awsome LS1 excpet there so damn expensive, I paid under 3k for my car and it almost as fast. Im on a tight budget, I couldnt afford to buy expensive mods for a camaro. So mustang wins in my eyes.
< Message edited by 90Mustangfan -- 11/4/2004 10:23:10 PM >
RE: Mach1 vs. ls1 trans am - 11/4/2004 10:21:05 PM
Guest
quote:
ORIGINAL: TommyV8
Ford's engineering is not too shabby. They just built a N/A 4.6L base V8 GT that can keep up with the 5.7L LS1 for a very reasonable price. Looks good and handles well, too. Gotta give credit where credit is due.
They did that a when the brought back the new Mach I too.
I like the 99-04 GTs a ton, but I gotta hand it to the 05 GT 3V motors.
Bottom line is that GM engineering > Ford's. Ford's marketing > GM.
Hey man, if you think I'm arguing, then my apologies. I thought I'm just having a cool discussion, didn't mean to offend anybody.
But why would you say GM engineering > Ford?
Because Ford uses a blower and GM doesn't? Well, a supercharged vehicle with a factory warranty is not as simple as some guy doing it in his own garage. It takes engineering to design a proper FI engine. If it's so simple, why didn't GM do it? instead of LS6, just SC an LS1 for the Z06.
And if you're talking about hp/liter (what most people think of when it comes to engine technology), then Mach1s and pre 03 Cobras rule again (excluding z06, different class).
Printable Version
RE: Mach1 vs. ls1 trans am - 
