LT1 Vs. 5.0 302 Mustang GT
07-14-2003, 09:07 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13
LT1 Vs. 5.0 302 Mustang GT
I am a die hard camaro/Trans Am fan. I currently own a doggy 91 RS and want to upgrade to a LT1 or LS1. That was all I was looking for until I test drove a friends 95 Mustang GT. This car was quite fast for me but I hear they are not near as fast as a LT1. I never drove an LT1 so I was just wondering if the difference in performance is noticeable? What are the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times for a LT1 and for a 95 Mustang GT? Thanks
07-14-2003, 09:32 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 869
Stock to stock doesn't compare. You have to do a lot to a stang to make it as fast as a LT1. Believe me, my brother has owned 5 stangs...including the last 5.0(95). Now, parts are a little cheaper and the engine bay is easier to work on in a stang, but if you did a heads/intake/cam on both cars...the LT1 would still be faster. It took my brother an E cam and cobra upper/lower intake just to hang with my Z...when he put the heads, tb, long tubes, gear, and exhaust it was quite a bit faster, but if I would of done the same thing to my car...it wouldn't of been a challenge. If you think a "stock" gt is fast...then you'll be blown away with the LT1...
JOHN
JOHN
07-14-2003, 09:58 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Browns Mills, New Jersey
Posts: 3,224
5.0's run low 15's high/mid 14's..some have ran better...LT1's run low 14's high 13's...so in some cases I guess you could say that a LT1 is about a second faster. Id go for the LS1 though, they run mid to low 13's stock..some have hit 12's...They run alot faster and trap a whole lot higher then LT1's...5.0 would need some very good mods just to hang w/ a stock 6spd Ls1.
07-14-2003, 10:00 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Browns Mills, New Jersey
Posts: 3,224
Originally posted by importeater
Dont know too much about the 5.0's.. One thing I can tell you is they look really nice in the rear view mirror
Heck until '03 stock for stock the Cobra's could bearly keep up!
Dont know too much about the 5.0's.. One thing I can tell you is they look really nice in the rear view mirror
Heck until '03 stock for stock the Cobra's could bearly keep up!
, yea even though 96-98 cobras were faster then lt1's..and 99/01 cobras are even faster
07-14-2003, 10:21 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: "Shoulda Gotton An LS1 Racin"
Posts: 872
Originally posted by Antz97ZNJ
, yea even though 96-98 cobras were faster then lt1's..and 99/01 cobras are even faster
, yea even though 96-98 cobras were faster then lt1's..and 99/01 cobras are even faster
07-14-2003, 10:29 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Palatine, IL
Posts: 80
I'd have to say it all depends on the particular car. Some LT1's were faster than mine stock. No 5.0 has ever beaten me stock vs. stock. But then again some 5.0's take better to mods than Lt1's do. Soo once again I'd say it's up to debate. The one 95 5.0 I've driven definitely would've gotten smoked by my car though.
07-14-2003, 11:26 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 391
I have a severely modded 96 SS, and a fairly stock 94 5.0 GT. While the LT1 would dominate the 5.0 any day of the week stock for stock, I do like the 5.0 for a daily driver.
It's been super reliable, no major probs at 156k (knock on wood). If anything does happen to break, parts are cheap, and it's easy to work on. Although some don't like the ergonomics of the SN95 (barcalounger seats, knee-intrusive dashboard, and the long reach for the shifter) I find it quite comfortable and easy to drive around town.
If you are planning on going all out crazy with the mods, either one can be as insanely fast as you desire.
I will be replacing the GT with and LS1 powered car in the future, either fbody or C5, when the money allows.
Bottom line: Go drive an LT1. If you thought the GT was fast, you'll be all 
for a week.
It's been super reliable, no major probs at 156k (knock on wood). If anything does happen to break, parts are cheap, and it's easy to work on. Although some don't like the ergonomics of the SN95 (barcalounger seats, knee-intrusive dashboard, and the long reach for the shifter) I find it quite comfortable and easy to drive around town.
If you are planning on going all out crazy with the mods, either one can be as insanely fast as you desire.
I will be replacing the GT with and LS1 powered car in the future, either fbody or C5, when the money allows.
Bottom line: Go drive an LT1. If you thought the GT was fast, you'll be all
for a week.
07-14-2003, 11:32 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Madison Heights, MI
Posts: 2,356
All my friends have 5.0 fox bodies and one has a 94 GT vert. A stock 5.0 GT SN or Fox vs a stock LT! is just unfair in favor of the LT1. If you want bang for the buck-go 5.0. It will not take much money at all to hang with an LT1. Parts are so easy and cheap that you could do it with no more than a few hundred if you shop right. The only disadvantage of the LT1 is the weight. But with the power and looks of the LT1 why would you ever want to go with the stang?
07-14-2003, 11:40 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Roanoke, Va
Posts: 208
Well, I think I may have some good input here. My first car was a 95 gt. Bone stock. Felt fast at first. Then I got used to the power and was ready for more. I drove a 95 z28 with 4.10's and catback and was blown away at the difference. I traded that mustang with my grandad for my 96 T/A that I have now. It was stock at the time and there is no comparison. Sure the 5.0's have potential. Just understand it will take some money.
07-14-2003, 11:50 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 869
If you really want a stang, get a 90-93 with low miles, throw a gear(3.73), and E cam, LT's, K&N, and an X pipe and you'd be pretty happy...plus it will be cheap. If you do all that you'll be around the high/mid 13's with some DR's.
