Search results

They sure are piggies

I don't know ANYONE in their 30's to 40's that cares for the Bullitt movie or the Steve McQueen name/brand. I'm in my mid/late 30's, and although a Mustang guy, also don't care for a Bullitt/McQueen car. I also think Ford dropped a ball not offering an A10. One step further, Ford dropped the...

Doesn't even look like a production car, whose even cares??

The '69 Mach1's did not have grille fog lights. They had grille high beams, the low beam was the standard light location. Mach1's didn't necessarily have chin spoilers either. That was added afterwards with the popularity of the Boss cars.

+1 Any answer for this question?

You are completely correct in your assessment of the legality/civil issues. Liability will likely be mixed, and favor can go either way in this scenario. To the OP, good luck.

When I worked at a dealership, the owner would have us put in the cheapest available gas only (87 octane) even if the car specified premium. I don't understand why you would dyno your car if some variables would be left questionable like that. It defeats the whole purpose.

More like 14% driveline losses considering SAE corrected would put it at ~395rwhp.

Most Ive seen peak right where this one peaked. I'm willing to bet that it would have made 5rwhp more at the very most, but most likely would have began falling off.

Those numbers are a little on the low end compared to some. They showed inflated STD numbers, SAE would have been ~393-397rwhp / 368-372rwtq. They aren't bad numbers tho, but seems most hit a bit more SAE. That said, although close, all dynos are not directly comparable.

Intristingly, the Mustang and camaro ran identical time 60-115mph. The Mustang stomps the camaro 100-150 by nearly 3 seconds. 100-115, the mustang did 2.9 seconds to the camaro's 3.2. The Mustang's top end is clearly better from 100+.

Yeah that is a stretch on their marketing's part. I rented a small Cadillac CUV a few weeks ago, that had a frameless mirror. Looked really cool.

I've been posting under this current screen name for almost a year. Your info shows you've been on the board for less than the total time I've been here actually. I don't see how that is relevant to anything tho. I may put a modded Coyote on my next build. We'll see, don't have too much room...

Maybe it's just me getting used to the tq that I stop feeling that "kick". My 69 Mach 1 makes 490rwtq and peaks hp at 460rwhp @5500 rpm, and falls off pretty quickly like the LT1. It scoots pretty good, but I don't really feel a kick anymore. Same with my old modded 03 Cobra.

Just more enjoyment out of wringing out the motor. Fuel cut off on the LT1 is at 6500, but that thing is out of breath by 6300 or so. You would be doing yourself a diservice taking it higher. The '18 5.0 goes to 7500, which is pretty good. Not Voodoo good, but not bad.

Inability to rev into the higher rpm s. I thought I covered that.

The crate engines for the Coyote Gen2 costs a good 25% less or so than the LT1. I'm not sure about the Gen3 tho since they carry all the direct injection hardware now as well.

Yes I have, including having taken a C7 Z06 around a track for a few laps. I am not a fan at all how they (LT1/LT4) sound and their inability to sing into the higher rpm's. If the C8 really goes DOHC, I may jump over to the other side. But I am not interested in what Chevy is currently offering...

The LT1 is more expensive than the Coyote Gen3, makes less power, and weighs the same. The only real advantage it has is off idle torque (great for a truck), but it's powerband falls on its face pretty quickly. Even tho my '69 Mach 1 has a similar power band (but with much more tq and hp), I...

Not happening.