# whats should a stock 04 got run in the 1/4



## lowazztruck (Jul 17, 2005)

i tried the seach already i couldnt find it. anyone have any info on e.t and mph


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

High 13's at low 100's.


----------



## 04YJ-GTO (Nov 7, 2007)

Motor Trend- 0-60 in 5.3 seconds and the 1/4 in 13.62 at 104.78 mph, some have gone as fast as 13.20s bone stock and very few have seen 13.00-13.10s bone stock


----------



## King Cobra (Mar 17, 2008)

The fastest reliable time I've seen for an 04 GTO with a manual tranny is a 13.52 by the guys at MM&FF. But most mags clock the 04 at around a 13.8 with the 6-speed with the autos being about .25-.4 seconds slower. However, I've spent a great deal of time at the track and have yet to see an 04 break out of the 14's with either transmission. The main problem most drivers have with them on the strip is trying to get a good launch with the IRS (a problem Cobra owners can certainly relate to...)

Anyone claiming they ran 13.2's or faster in a stock 04 GTO is someone who is prone to wild exaggeration...i.e. a liar. :rofl:


----------



## 06brazengto (Sep 21, 2007)

LS1GTO.com Forums - LS1 N/A Stock and Modified Classes
fastest stock 04 13.025 @ 108.31


----------



## King Cobra (Mar 17, 2008)

People exaggerate. The MPH alone gives him away. 

By the way, I once ran a 13.989 at 99.59mph in a stock 1998 Mustang GT. Now, if I post the timeslip here does that mean you'll automatically believe that the timeslip I posted was run by the car I claim it was? 

Cause I really did. I swear it, man!:cool


----------



## 04YJ-GTO (Nov 7, 2007)

06brazengto said:


> LS1GTO.com Forums - LS1 N/A Stock and Modified Classes
> fastest stock 04 13.025 @ 108.31


thank you


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

I`m really surprised the new ones don`t go faster. I was able to nearly do as fast as that the last time I went to the track. 40+ yrs of tech and they barely go faster, I`d say Pontiac had it right the first time around.


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

For those of us who actually grew up at the track, racing every weekend, instead of benchracing online.....

350hp + 3750-3800 lbs = [email protected] only in La La Land, where fairies and leprechauns dance gleefully, and candy apples and gumdrops rain from the sky....

It's not just improbable, it's impossible.... 

And there were ALWAYS wiseguys bringing "stock" cars to the track running too-quick-to-be-true times, claiming that nothing was done, and they were always, ALWAYS, cheating to impress themselves with how clever they were... Extrude-honing, sneaky-pete systems, strokers, you name it, all you had to do was pour enough free beer down one of his buddy's throats, and eventually he'd start giggling and give up the hoax, the secrets to the performance...

I defy anyone here to find a dead-stock '04 Goat, any tranny, take it to the best track that's right at sea-level, hire yourself a "ringer" driver, and try to snake that kind of time. Good luck with that.... LS1 powered CORVETTES barely tickle 108+ mph in the traps, and took a miracle to get a launch that would afford 13.0's on stock tires and stock struts.... That's the same motor folks, minus 500+ pounds....

I can see this thread now showing up on the Mustang forums, and getting laughed at....

I apologize for being such a maniacal jerk in this post, but trust me, there's no going out and running 13-flats at 108+ in a stock LS1 GTO... You're going to have a tough enough time getting those numbers out of an LS2, you've gotta nail your launch, snick-snick the shifts, and hope the weather is cool and dry...


----------



## King Cobra (Mar 17, 2008)

I totally agree, 69Bossnine. Ironically, you could never get away with these sorts of wild claims on a Mustang forum, since Mustang owners are notorious track rats and know what late model cars are capable of. But some forums (especially the "Import Tuner" forums) are filled with bench racers who are willing to believe anything anyone posts, particularly when it involves a car they own.

I even pointed out the fact that the 108mph figure shows that the car in question is making at least 35-50 horsepower more than a stock 04 GTO, but, hey, people will believe what they want to believe. The 04 GTO's are bad ass rides, but they're not THAT bad ass...at least not stock...


----------



## cody6.0 (Nov 28, 2006)

King Cobra said:


> I totally agree, 69Bossnine. Ironically, you could never get away with these sorts of wild claims on a Mustang forum, since Mustang owners are notorious track rats and know what late model cars are capable of. But some forums (especially the "Import Tuner" forums) are filled with bench racers who are willing to believe anything anyone posts, particularly when it involves a car they own.
> 
> I even pointed out the fact that the 108mph figure shows that the car in question is making at least 35-50 horsepower more than a stock 04 GTO, but, hey, people will believe what they want to believe. The 04 GTO's are bad ass rides, but they're not THAT bad ass...at least not stock...




Actually Mustang owners are some of the biggest bull****ters when it comes to 1/4 mile times, seconded only by SRT-8 owners.

Mustang owners are also the biggest liars when it comes to " Stock " times.


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

cody6.0 said:


> Actually Mustang owners are some of the biggest bull****ters when it comes to 1/4 mile times, seconded only by SRT-8 owners.
> 
> Mustang owners are also the biggest liars when it comes to " Stock " times.


Thanks for that precisely researched and scientific data.... 

Oh the irony, that you would blanket two enormous groups as baseless exaggerators, by making a baseless and exaggerated statement... Pot?? Meet Kettle.... Kettle, this is Pot.....


----------



## NJG8GT (Nov 14, 2007)

The wikepedia or what ever it is called has some good facts on anything you want to research. I checked it out for the 1970 GTO and my head was spinning by the time I got done. Differnt motor options, Judge stripes, and ofcourse the limited "HUMBLER" editions that were made with the exhaust cut outs!!! That is bad. Love the commercial. I'll post it again:willy:


----------



## NJG8GT (Nov 14, 2007)

*Humbler*

The Humbler baby!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3GLNYzoZEM


----------



## 04YJ-GTO (Nov 7, 2007)

cody6.0 said:


> Actually Mustang owners are some of the biggest bull****ters when it comes to 1/4 mile times, seconded only by SRT-8 owners.
> 
> Mustang owners are also the biggest liars when it comes to " Stock " times.


:lol:


----------



## cody6.0 (Nov 28, 2006)

I didn't mean to make such a blanket statement but for the most part it's true. Have some of you seen what some of these guys have claimed to do in stock form?

Oh well it's just the internet.


----------



## Jimmy TJ (Nov 22, 2007)

I finally got my '04 down too the track and had my ego handed too me. Like King Cobra said I could not get my car out of the 14's. The best I ran was a 14.015 @ 103.95. There was an '05 or '06 that was actually running slower then me.


----------



## PWR_SHIFT (Feb 10, 2005)

Jimmy TJ said:


> I finally got my '04 down too the track and had my ego handed too me. Like King Cobra said I could not get my car out of the 14's. The best I ran was a 14.015 @ 103.95. There was an '05 or '06 that was actually running slower then me.


That's not too bad . . . the trap speed shows that the motor is making the power, basically you just need to work on your launch and shifting.


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

Yep, the 104mph should be good for 13.50-13.60 if you put together a 2.0-2.10 60-foot with fast/accurate shifts...


----------



## Chrisco (Mar 19, 2007)

I wonder what the best 60' time is in a stock or stockish GTO is. Or even what people are getting on average.


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

Chrisco said:


> I wonder what the best 60' time is in a stock or stockish GTO is. Or even what people are getting on average.


The GTO is a trickt car to launch. It doesn't like anything that isn't perfectly smooth and rewards that with wheel hop. I was able to get a 1.99 once on stock tires. Typically I got 2.01-2.08.


----------



## Chrisco (Mar 19, 2007)

fergyflyer said:


> The GTO is a trickt car to launch. It doesn't like anything that isn't perfectly smooth and rewards that with wheel hop. I was able to get a 1.99 once on stock tires. Typically I got 2.01-2.08.


Wow. Grand Prix's can get 1.9's on street tires. I thought it would be better than that considering its RWD. IRS is a bitch.


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

lowazztruck said:


> i tried the seach already i couldnt find it. anyone have any info on e.t and mph


do you have a 6 speed or a Automatic ? good guess for either should be around a 13.7 depending on driver


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

If you've got any long-term multi-car experience at the strip, you'll realize that getting ANY stock car under the 2.0 second barrier in the 60-ft, on stock tires, is a real trick.. Even if you've got the power, you've got the problem of traction... Add more power, expect more grief with traction that REALLY tests your technique and ability to adapt, feather, short-shift, soft-clutch, etc.etc.etc..... 

Remember that a Grand Prix is FWD, the weight of the engine & transaxle is sitting right on top of the drive wheels mashing them to the pavement.. traction is of lesser issue than RWD..

The strongest-leaving stock-tire vehicle I've ever owned was my 2000 F150 Lightning.... It was good for 1.88-1.92 60-footers any day, every day.. They set those things up right in the chassis department!! But if you got a bit too greedy, once the tires would light, give up trying to re-gain grip.... the run was done, and you just coasted through and tried again with a bit less aggression...


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

69bossnine said:


> If you've got any long-term multi-car experience at the strip, you'll realize that getting ANY stock car under the 2.0 second barrier in the 60-ft, on stock tires, is a real trick.. Even if you've got the power, you've got the problem of traction... Add more power, expect more grief with traction that REALLY tests your technique and ability to adapt, feather, short-shift, soft-clutch, etc.etc.etc.....
> 
> Remember that a Grand Prix is FWD, the weight of the engine & transaxle is sitting right on top of the drive wheels mashing them to the pavement.. traction is of lesser issue than RWD..
> 
> The strongest-leaving stock-tire vehicle I've ever owned was my 2000 F150 Lightning.... It was good for 1.88-1.92 60-footers any day, every day.. They set those things up right in the chassis department!! But if you got a bit too greedy, once the tires would light, give up trying to re-gain grip.... the run was done, and you just coasted through and tried again with a bit less aggression...



Thanks!!!

I was thinking it was maybe just me. I've gotten my C5 Z06 to 1.93. This current Vette, a C4, and my old C6 were pretty similar, 1.97-1.99, which I'm very happy with. My GTO and my F-bodies were low 2.0's. Everyone told me I was doing real well with the GTO to get it to low 2.0's. 

I've never been able to get a FWD car below 2.15 on street tires. I think my best was a 2.18 my Contour SVT, but I don't remember exatly and 2.15 is definately the low side. 

Anyone have any Idea what to expect from n AWD car??? I've seen stuff in the 1.7's, but I'm not certain that was on street tires. I think it was, but I'm not sure.


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

The best I ever got out of my '93 C4 6-speed was a 1.98... Which netted me my best-ever E.T. with it 13.02 @ 108.1... I always believed my C4 was a "factory freak", as that was with nothing more than Borla Cat-back, open-face filter lid with K&N, and a performance chip that gave a bit of torque, but nothing really on the top-end...

Dead stock, bone bone bone (I mean 1,700 miles, paper filter and factory oil still in the crankcase!), the car ran 13.40 @ 107+ on the first night I ever ran it. I dialed 13.39 that night, and won fast trophy on its maiden night! My C4 was a great drag car... I never owned a C5, but I ran my mom's 6-speed convertible a few times and the wheel-hop was intense, never did get better than a 2.04 out of it...


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

69bossnine said:


> The best I ever got out of my '93 C4 6-speed was a 1.98... Which netted me my best-ever E.T. with it 13.02 @ 108.1... I always believed my C4 was a "factory freak", as that was with nothing more than Borla Cat-back, open-face filter lid with K&N, and a performance chip that gave a bit of torque, but nothing really on the top-end...
> 
> Dead stock, bone bone bone (I mean 1,700 miles, paper filter and factory oil still in the crankcase!), the car ran 13.40 @ 107+ on the first night I ever ran it. I dialed 13.39 that night, and won fast trophy on its maiden night! My C4 was a great drag car... I never owned a C5, but I ran my mom's 6-speed convertible a few times and the wheel-hop was intense, never did get better than a 2.04 out of it...


I'm having a hard time with this C4. I'm just an intake, exhaust and chip/tune away from running as fast as my C6. It's gotten a couple 13.0x and it's bone stock. The LT4 is just awesome. The hard part is this car is so rare and this one is so clean, that I don't want to mod her and ruin the value and uniqueness. I'm just hanging on till Fall. I think when the ZR1 hits the showroom, the C6 Z06's will drop in value a bit and dealers will start discounting them. Then I'll snatch one of those and run mid to low 11's stock and be DR's away from the 10's. 

The C4 with the LT1/LT4 was really underated. I know the C5 was stiffer and handled a bit better and rode much better. It also had lots less parts than the C4, but in terms of advances, the car, until the C5 Z06 showed up, wasn't much faster, and didn't advance the breed considering that the C4 was 15 years old.


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

I agree,

I loved my '93, but never did warm up to the non-Z06 C5... The drive-by-wire calibration stunk (IMHO), both making the car feel soggy and torque-less in the low-end, and making smooth gear shifts a matter of "luck". The steering was about as dead and slow as a 50-year-old hooker, The interior seemed more generic, and the styling didn't have the natural good looks of the round-bumper 92-96 C4... Plus I swear the road-noise was worse in the C5... 

I just never could get excited enough to buy a C5, and have been out of the Corvette fold ever since. I've driven the C6 however, and they've REALLY make amends on alot of my old issues, along with 6.0, 6.2 and 7.0...

I'd love to have the new ZR-1, if I just didn't have to PAY for it... LOL!!!

Someday I've promised myself to buy a low-mile C4 to put back in the stable as a "play" car, I really miss the old gal... I might be tempted to step up to the '96 LT4 though...


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

69bossnine said:


> I agree,
> 
> I loved my '93, but never did warm up to the non-Z06 C5... The drive-by-wire calibration stunk (IMHO), both making the car feel soggy and torque-less in the low-end, and making smooth gear shifts a matter of "luck". The steering was about as dead and slow as a 50-year-old hooker, The interior seemed more generic, and the styling didn't have the natural good looks of the round-bumper 92-96 C4... Plus I swear the road-noise was worse in the C5...
> 
> ...


I think the noise issue comes mostly from the run-flats. My C6 was noisier than my C5 Z06. The Z06 didn't have run-flats. I switched to a Firestone Wide-Oval RFT on the C6 and must have lost 5 decibels at cruise. The GoodRock EMT tire is horrible, not fit for an ox-cart.


----------



## 69bossnine (Aug 9, 2007)

fergyflyer said:


> The GoodRock EMT tire is horrible, not fit for an ox-cart.


That's probably why Porsche gives you a good set of Michelins, a cig-lighter-powered air compressor, some plugs and patches, and a "Gluck auf!" (good luck)... Having to call AAA in a pinch beats living life on run-flats...


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

69bossnine said:


> That's probably why Porsche gives you a good set of Michelins, a cig-lighter-powered air compressor, some plugs and patches, and a "Gluck auf!" (good luck)... Having to call AAA in a pinch beats living life on run-flats...


My Firestone Wide-Ovals were very liveable, and I've heard good things about Bridgestones also. (I know same company) 

GM did the same thing in the C5 Z06. They gave you a really good air compressor, and a bottle of Slime. The Slime will patch multiple holes and doesn't affect your speed rating. Too many people complained that there wasn't a spare or run-flats. 

For the people that wanted spares, the best option was ............ the spare tire from a GTO. Lots of people bought GTO limited use spares to have in their C5 Z06 for the occasions that they would take the car on a long trip and wanted something more than the slime.


----------

