Craigcd VS 5.0L Mustang

Allright so i have been driving my car with the SR in it for about 2 month. It has ultimatley taken this long to find a race. I could drive my girlfriends civic for half an hour and every car on the street would want to race me, but i usually shy away from the embarassment.

So i was pulling up to an intersection this evening, a Mustang was allready sitting there. By the time is stopped the light was allready turning green we both looked at each other and it was on. It was pretty even off the start i think he might have got a crappy start, i had about 2 car lengths on him 8-) . He had to switch lanes becasue there was a car infront of him so he went around the car. I popped it into 4th thinking he had had enough. Apparently not, he pulled up beside me and we did a rolling start i down shifted to 3rd pulled on him again by 2 car lengths. AWESOME. That is a milestone for sure, nothing like killing 5.0 's. Maybe his car sucked i dont know it had the stock body kit which i think makes is a GT or a Cobra, which ultimatly makes it slower, power everything, leather, body kit, A/C ect. Might have helped a bit.

Glad i got that out of the system now i can let her rest over the winter until spring :frown:

Craig

power to weight wins out every time :D

Wow, that is impressive. Have you had it dynoed?

If it was a GT, yes, it's slower because of the body kit, if it's the Cobra, it's a whole different story, different heads, intake, cam, fuel injection, etc. But impressive none the less.

Good kill!

I've beaten one of the older 5.0 GT's on a highway run in a stock VG30 S12. The 5.0 is great off the line, but it seems their top end isn't so great.

How much power do they make? 80s and 90s V8s in australia are fairly weak cars, it's only since the very late 90s that they have started on the 350-400hp models. Before that the 6 cylinder versions were almost as fast or faster than the V8s...

Lets see, the 5.0's switched to a MAF sensor in 89, and they were rated at 205 hp from the factory. But they're only a few bolt-ons away from 300. They came from the factory with headers, an h-pipe, and a true dual exhaust, and I would be willing to guess that there were more 5 speeds than autos. The 5.0 HO was the beginning of a rebirth of American muscle, and led to the F-body (Camaro and Firebird) coming out with the 275hp LT1 in 93, and then the 305hp LS1 in 98. Now there's the new LS2 in the vette making 400hp, and the Z06 will supposedly be making 500. The new Ford GT (supercharged) is well over 500, and the 03 Mustang Cobra is well over 400.

I know most of you all hate any American cars, but they're finally back to making some real power.

[edit] I was gonna add too that Mustangs seem to really seriously drop off a lotta power when they get over 100k miles. I've seen low mileage 5.0's with a few bolt ons run 13's all day long on street tires, and I've seen high mileage 5.0's with all the parts you can throw at them run high 14's. :mrgreen: Depends a lot on the driver too...

Lets see, the 5.0's switched to a MAF sensor in 89, and they were rated at 205 hp from the factory.
no....it was 225hp. I believe that was also at the rear wheels. The change to 205 was listed in 93 even though they listed no reason for the drop in rating.

http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/history_79_93.htm

scroll down and you can see the ratings by years.

Wow, that is impressive. Have you had it dynoed?

Havent Dynoed yet i wont get a chance to next year im going to turn my boost up and dyno in the spring. Not sure what i would even be at, stock SR with 2.5 Exhaust no emissions, cone filter, FMIC with.

Craig

If it was a GT, yes, it's slower because of the body kit, if it's the Cobra, it's a whole different story, different heads, intake, cam, fuel injection, etc. But impressive none the less.

Good kill!

My guess is that it wasnt a Cobra. I will go Cobra hunting next year. :spy:

How much power do they make? 80s and 90s V8s in australia are fairly weak cars, it's only since the very late 90s that they have started on the 350-400hp models. Before that the 6 cylinder versions were almost as fast or faster than the V8s...

My brother recently returned from travelling Aus, he said he didnt see many USD cars at all. The late 80's and early 90's Mustangs are crazy fast, and like posted above can make power really easy with bolt ons. I know a guy with a Twin turbo 5.0 whistles all the way down the track, runs 11's :lick:

I believe that was also at the rear wheels.

You're right about the 225, I misread that part, but it's not at the wheels, factory ratings are always flywheel ratings. Although I wouldn't be surprised if it was a little underrated, so it might have been close to 200 at the wheels from the factory. Kinda like the LS1 cars that were rated at 305, but were making 295 at the wheels... :laugh: Probably mostly because they couldn't be rated higher than the almighty Vette, which was rated at 350...

I know a guy with a Twin turbo 5.0 whistles all the way down the track, runs 11's

Hehehe... Check out this site:

http://www.toohighpsi.com

And check out the budget built CARB'd twin turbo Capri running 10's and driven to and from the track.

not true......in 1972 they changed hp rating from the crank to the rear wheels to help with the rising costs of insurance. If you look at the hp ratings there is a huge drop from 71 to 72 and it's not related to detuning of the engines. They had already dropped the compression ratios in 71 to deal with the restrictions being placed on the industry at the time.

Besides have you ever watched Horse Power TV? they dyno stock cars before putting work into them and the numbers they come up with are really close to advertised numbers. And they always use a chassie dyno unless they are buliding a crazy race engine from scratch.

My brother recently returned from travelling Aus, he said he didnt see many USD cars at all.
USDM cars are rarely brought out here and when they are they are rarely popular.
We have gotten the neon, voyager, PT Cruiser (the most successfull i've seen), Mustang Cobra, Taurus (don't think anyone bought one tho), Suburban and probably a few others i can't think of.
Generally they have been poorly recieved though.

USDM cars are rarely brought out here and when they are they are rarely popular.
We have gotten the neon, voyager, PT Cruiser (the most successfull i've seen), Mustang Cobra, Taurus (don't think anyone bought one tho), Suburban and probably a few others i can't think of.
Generally they have been poorly recieved though.

Yaa he said there was the odd Camaro or firebird that some mullet heads must have brought over or something. On the walk from the airport to my car he said he had seen more trucks in the 5 minute walk than he had seen in the last 7 months.

Hehe yeah aussies love utes but trucks aren't really big here at all. He probably saw literally hundreds of commos and falcons here tho hehe

in 1972 they changed hp rating from the crank to the rear wheels to help with the rising costs of insurance

Nope. They changed from gross ratings to net ratings. Before 72-73, they rated the motors with no accessories, open exhausts, etc. Then they put all the crap on em, and ran em through full exhausts to get a more realistic hp number. So, were the old LT-1 Camaro's actually making 375 hp? Most likely not.

Now in the newer cars (F-body's and such) they still use the same net rating, but a lot of times they do underrate them sometimes, but mostly because in the GM world, the Vette is king, and nobody can be faster or make more power, or it gets killed. Why do you think they killed the Buick GN?

The GN and the Fiero

Fiero GT was actually a better track performer than the Vette. I'm sure the hoardes of problems helped too. The LS1 Firehawk actually made more power on the dyno than the Vette, they just kept advertising it lower.

Kind of like how the Skyline has been rated at the same power level for years, even though they keep upgrading it.

Or how the 426 Hemi was rated at 425hp, yet there are records from Mopar factories where the engines were dynoed before being installed, showing power levels to actually be over 500hp.

And you're 100% right about the switch over from gross to net hp.

It was an insurance thing ... by 73 the gas crunch hit, so they started really hurting the motors with super low compression, air pumps and all kinds of other ick.

My Charger's motor was originally rated at 190hp. 6.6L to make 190hp.

Granted by that point the 400 was running turbo pistons. Well, 7.2:1 CR.

Mustangs can be made to go fast, and that 302 responds very well to bolt ons. But they are after all Fords, and the more you drive them, the slower they get.

Don't buy into advertised horsepower – ever. Ford is being sued right now by former engineers for lying about the power output on the new Cobras. Apparently when they first designed the motor, it made that power, but had a ton of problems. The redesigned motor that they ended up going with was making a lot less power, but they continued to advertise it as being the prototype.

Keep in mind, the Mustang has always come in second place to the Camaro and Firechicken as far as power and speed.

The 4.6s are crap. I walked a 4.6 Thunderturd (auto) with my 200sx with only IC, 12psi and a 60mm TB. Apparently the newer ones are a lot better, but yeah.

Good kill. 5.0 Mustangs really have become the "kings of the street" as far as budget builders. They're cheap, V8 powered, and have an enormous aftermarket.

But they are after all Fords, and the more you drive them, the slower they get.

You have no idea how right you are.