View Poll Results: 1993 Eagle Talon ES vs. 1989 Ford Mustang 5.0
1993 Eagle Talon ES (non-turbo)
1
9.09%
1989 Ford Mustang 5.0
10
90.91%
Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll
1993 Eagle Talon non-turbo vs. 1989 Ford Mustang 5.0
08-04-2003, 02:26 PM
#1
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
1993 Eagle Talon non-turbo vs. 1989 Ford Mustang 5.0
OK, sorry to post this but a guy I work with claims when he first bought his 1993 "non-turbo" Eagle Talon ES beat a 1989 Ford Mustang 5.0 ... Please vote in the poll as to who you think would win. I'm telling him it isn't possible.
08-04-2003, 02:35 PM
#2
Unregistered Member
Non-turbo?
He's on crack if he thinks he can beat a 5.0L Mustang with a non-turbo Talon.
Even if the Mustang driver had his e-brake on, he's still beat a non-turbo Talon
He's on crack if he thinks he can beat a 5.0L Mustang with a non-turbo Talon.
Even if the Mustang driver had his e-brake on, he's still beat a non-turbo Talon
08-04-2003, 02:51 PM
#4
1-2-3-4-5-6-speeeeeed!!!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Yonkers, NY
Age: 45
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys before my Cl-S I had a 93 Talon ES
It was Quick!! I had a non-turbo and my cuz had a turbo, let me tell you the turbo is fast, but the non-turbo is quick (5 speed) keeped up until high speed when the boost poped in!!
So I wont give you guys an answer but it can very well be true!!
This was my brother's Talon before me and there were races between Talons and Mustangs LX 5.0 all the time when they first came out, so I wouldnt doubt him, IT COULD VERY WELL BE TRUE!!
It was Quick!! I had a non-turbo and my cuz had a turbo, let me tell you the turbo is fast, but the non-turbo is quick (5 speed) keeped up until high speed when the boost poped in!!
So I wont give you guys an answer but it can very well be true!!
This was my brother's Talon before me and there were races between Talons and Mustangs LX 5.0 all the time when they first came out, so I wouldnt doubt him, IT COULD VERY WELL BE TRUE!!
08-04-2003, 03:08 PM
#5
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 46
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talon is 140hp. Mustang is 215hp. Torque for the mustang is MUCH MUCH more. No contest. A well taken care of 5.0 would give a CLS (auto) a good run
08-04-2003, 03:20 PM
#6
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: usa
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard. i have driven both of those cars and there is no way in hell a talon would come anywhere close to beating a stang.
im going to have to disagree with classycls, because the talon I drove was the slowest hunk of crap...i was driving a 1988 4 door integra back then and my integra would smoke the talon. and my integra was slow as hell.
im going to have to disagree with classycls, because the talon I drove was the slowest hunk of crap...i was driving a 1988 4 door integra back then and my integra would smoke the talon. and my integra was slow as hell.
08-04-2003, 03:25 PM
#7
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Talon is 140hp. Mustang is 215hp. Torque for the mustang is MUCH MUCH more. No contest. A well taken care of 5.0 would give a CLS (auto) a good run
I agree and I don't think the Talon could keep up with my CLS but I would think the Mustang could though.
Trending Topics
08-04-2003, 03:25 PM
#8
1-2-3-4-5-6-speeeeeed!!!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Yonkers, NY
Age: 45
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guys it was only my opinion, I personally never drove a stang so I cant honestly say if it was quick or not, but what I am saying is that the Talon will give you that punch for a non-turbo, BUT the TSI AWD will give the Stang a challenge!!
My Talon was the ES with some light mods, mostly suspension, and I did beat Civcs, Integras, etc...
My Talon was the ES with some light mods, mostly suspension, and I did beat Civcs, Integras, etc...
08-04-2003, 03:45 PM
#10
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Not tearin' up on you Classy and I agree they are pretty quick for non-turbo but I just think it's far reached. But your opinion was taken into consideration only b/c you're the only one that previously owned one. The stang is just so quick and has soo much torque.
BTW - Nice lookin Talon...
BTW - Nice lookin Talon...
08-04-2003, 04:50 PM
#12
What can I get ya?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Mechanicsburg, Pa
Age: 43
Posts: 2,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mpgn04
an 89 5.0 that is well taken care of should beat a stock automatic cl-s.
an 89 5.0 that is well taken care of should beat a stock automatic cl-s.
I highly doubt that, I can beat most old 5.0's. A cl-s will rip it a new one.
LOL
08-05-2003, 08:16 AM
#14
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: usa
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by moforose3.0
I highly doubt that, I can beat most old 5.0's. A cl-s will rip it a new one.
I highly doubt that, I can beat most old 5.0's. A cl-s will rip it a new one.
I havent raced a GT yet, but before I bought my cl-s (two months ago) I had a 1994 mustang GT. my buddys 1990 GT was a lot quicker than mine...and I thought my GT felt about the same speed as my cl-s. Maybe its just that the stang feels faster since its rougher and louder than the acuras. You could be right... I would imagine it would be pretty close though.
Also, his mustang had about 50k on it and was in perfect condition. Most of the older stangs on the street have a ton of miles and run like shit. I know I lost a ton of power in my old mustang after the miles went to 6 figures.
08-20-2003, 12:55 PM
#16
Instructor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Newark, DE
Age: 49
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
89 5.0 always a crap shoot. auto, vert may run high 15s even in relatively good shape, but still enough to stomp an n/a talon.
my brother's 88 GT, 102k, 5 spd ran 14.9@89 mph, running like shit up top. After new air filter, plugs, wires, cap, rotor, advanced timing, removed cats and added mufflers and new tires it ran 14.3@95 mph; pretty much brining it back to where it should have been stock.
my brother's 88 GT, 102k, 5 spd ran 14.9@89 mph, running like shit up top. After new air filter, plugs, wires, cap, rotor, advanced timing, removed cats and added mufflers and new tires it ran 14.3@95 mph; pretty much brining it back to where it should have been stock.
08-21-2003, 11:28 AM
#17
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: LONG ISLAND NY
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my 1988 5.0 stock kicked the shit out of that car
when i put in 3.55's, forget about it
in 1988 there were only 2 cars made in usa faster then gt, vette and buick gn, that's why i got it for under 15 k
when i put in 3.55's, forget about it
in 1988 there were only 2 cars made in usa faster then gt, vette and buick gn, that's why i got it for under 15 k
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
