Posts: 1176
Joined: 10/19/2003 From: martinez, ca Status: offline
"My EPA is 22/28 I believe. I've been averaging over 20mpg. I have gears and my car sees redline quite often."
You average about 25 mpg and you have gears and open it up often....well i dont wanna call you a liar but i have friends with more then a few fbodys and they are pretty much stock and dont mash all that much and are lucky if they see 20. Are you on the freeway all the time or something? I myself like to open my car up but im not racing around everywhere and i usually get about 18-19 and i consider that pretty good. Of course on the freeway i get a lot better.
And LS1 CAN get 28 on the highway (rated at 18 city) if you drive conservatively (is't just me or does that sounds like a oxymoron together with LS1 ) But you'd have to put up with a lot of skipshifting and lugging.
However, that is bone stock, add some of those crazy cams making 600hp and just watch your mileage dip into the single digits. A 600 hp Supra can get 25 mpg all day, the reason being that a turbo is totally inactive under light driving, and your engine will function just like a regular 3.0 I6. A 700 hp Cobra with stock internals would also get similar gas mileage as a stock one.
But, please, stop the argument of Chevy vs. Ford. I said in my last post that I have nothing against either, and even went as far as calling a naturally aspirated LS1 "work of art".
Posts: 4019
Joined: 7/26/2004 From: St. Louis, MO Status: offline
I have an almost completely stock automatic LS1 (air intake, that's it) with 2.73 gears and I get 22-23 mpg. That's almost all highway. When I did highway/city I got 20 mpg. My g/f has 3.23 gears in her Z28 and gets less than that. I would think that with 3.73's you would get horrible mileage.
Posts: 1366
Joined: 12/12/2003 From: United States Status: offline
i cant believe that stupid engine gets better mpg than my "economy" car. i got 18/26 stock. best ever was 31 hwy on a road trip. needles to say, i got much lesss w/ big turbo and shorter gears.
Posts: 4019
Joined: 7/26/2004 From: St. Louis, MO Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mach1 Another ls1 guy who cant handle the fact that the second down in the line stang can take an ls1.
If the Mach is a manual and the LS1 is an auto then yes it can happen, although I went 13.52 @ 104 stock, probably quicker than most Mach 1's. Manual vs manual or especially auto vs auto the advantage is to the LS1, assuming comparable driving skills.
Posts: 1366
Joined: 12/12/2003 From: United States Status: offline
oh, mach 1 guy...i see you live in martinez. im from richmond. maybe we can find some action when i drive down there again. how does milpitas or concord sound?
Both can be sticks and it can happen. Ls1s arent unbeatable ya know. The gearing in those things suck, first gear ends like at 55.
What are you talking about? An M6 LS1 comes with 3.42 gears stock. With a 6 speed tranny that brings the gearing down lower than the actual 3.42. It's nearly like having 3.73's from the factory. I've had one, although it was an LT1 car. Hell, it's an option on the A4 LS1's to get 3.27's. This guy, TommyV8, went 13.5 with ****ty 2.73 gears. Let's see a Mach I auto with 2.73's out back run 14.5, much less a 13.5.
Mach I's are awesome cars, but they're not gonna run with an LS1 unless it is an A4 with 2.73 gears. Then the Mach I will have a chance from a dig. From a roll, it'd be ugly.
If you can show me where Mach I's are putting down 300+ rwhp bone stock, then I'll say you have a decent argument. But I don't see it happening.
< Message edited by 98LS1 -- 11/9/2004 4:16:24 PM >
Printable Version
RE: Mach1 vs. ls1 trans am - 
) But you'd have to put up with a lot of skipshifting and lugging. 
please dont say that.
