1/4 mile times list

[68Mustang]

weeellll....

A stock '69 Z/28 ran mid 13s...I had one....well, I ordered one but went to Saudi instead.

 

[UNGN]

Re: weeellll....

Originally posted by 68Mustang
A stock '69 Z/28 ran mid 13s...I had one....well, I ordered one but went to Saudi instead.

Actually they didn't. At least no magazine ever ran one that fast. Not even dual quad versions.

With headers, slicks and other mods maybe. But not stock from the showroom.

The best magazine review was in the 14.3 range and some road tests were in the 15's.

The '69 Z28 is a good car, but not a 13 second car in showroom form.

 

[68Mustang]

When I ordered mine the salesman said his Z ran 13.7 at 104. Stock

 

[UNGN]

Originally posted by 68Mustang
When I ordered mine the salesman said his Z ran 13.7 at 104. Stock

That pretty much says it all.

The 1969 Z28 was one of the most popular musclecars of all time and the BEST road test ever recorded by a magazine was 14.3 and it was very likely a cross-rammed dual 4bbl car. I've seen single 4bbl road tests of 15.1@95 mph. The accepted zero to 60 time for a '69 Z28 is 7.3 seconds... It was rated at 290 GROSS HP which is around 240 in todays net. Even if it was underated and actually made 50 more gross HP, it still wouldn't run mid 13's stock in 1969.

If the salesmans car had headers, slicks, open exhaust and tuning, sure he could run mid 13's @ 104. But that isn't stock. Or, he was lying, as car saleman have been known to do from time to time.

You don't have to believe me, look around the internet yourself. Check out the various 50 fastest musclecars lists. The 60's Z28's are no where to be found. ZL1, COPO's, L78's, sure. Z28's? no.

 

[68Mustang]

Magazines...lol. Look at Car and Driver. The fastest time they could pull down in a '03 Cobra was 13.3 when MM&FF got 12.67...

 

[UNGN]

Originally posted by 68Mustang
Magazines...lol. Look at Car and Driver. The fastest time they could pull down in a '03 Cobra was 13.3 when MM&FF got 12.67...

Read the article again (June 2002). Car and Driver recorded a 12.9, only .23 seconds different than the "gods" at MM&FF .

Car and Driver also doesn't put Ice on the intake, soak the tires in VHT, remove the airfilter, put 45 psi in the front tires, loosen the front swaybar and run on a Prepped track you can't even walk on without losing a shoe. They also rarely test cars at night at sea level tracks with density altitudes of 1000 feet below sea level.

I'll believe an objective magazine with a standard test procedure over a car salesman or a Non-objective magazine with an "anything goes, just get a low ET" test procedure, every time.

I'm sure you've been to the track a lot, what do your cars run?

 

[68Mustang]

The Charger ran 11.7. That was according to the previous owner.

 

[UNGN]

Originally posted by 68Mustang
The Charger ran 11.7. That was according to the previous owner.

So you never been to the track with any of your cars?

People think because Evan Smith can run 12.67 with a '03 Mustang Cobra, that they can go to the track and run a 12.67 with their '03 Cobra. It doesn't work that way.

Bench racers and people that never go to the track can argue numbers until they are blue in the face, but the odds are pretty good that they will NEVER run the numbers published in magazines for a given car if there car is stock. That is just a fact of life. I've seen it happen too many times to count to think differently about this.

 

[68Mustang]

I know I would be lucky to get 13 flat in a 03 Cobra. I don't overestimate my driving abilities. But you have no idea of what they are, so please don't insult them.