Is it normal for us to keep up with 4.6L Mustang's??
10-19-2003, 07:16 PM
#1
Team Owner
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 36,474
Received 249 Likes
on
175 Posts
Is it normal for us to keep up with 4.6L Mustang's??
I pulled along side a Mustang GT yesterday. Looked like a '96-'98. We are at about 40mph when he gives a lil "beep-beep" on his horn. So I look over. He grins and goes "beep----beep----beep" and we are off. We stay right along side of each other till about 90 where I start to pull away slowly. At 105 I shut it down and he also slowed down and pulled in behind me. I am totally stock. Is this supposed to happen???
10-19-2003, 07:33 PM
#2
Race Director
Well you being totally stock it is a little surprising at those speeds however the 96-98 GT's are some of the slowest V8 stangs around and can be good competition for a CLS w/ mods. 
10-19-2003, 07:54 PM
#4
something witty
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Orange County
Age: 44
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i run my buddies 96 gt, all i gots is an icebox and i always walk away from him. he swears he is doing something wrong, but it seems like all 4.6's aren't that fast.
10-19-2003, 08:04 PM
#5
Team Owner
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 36,474
Received 249 Likes
on
175 Posts
I have a friend with a '94 or '95 GT. Those have the 5.0. He has an intake and flowmasters. Also he removed the cats. I've never run him before. Might have to try when he gets home from school.
10-19-2003, 08:29 PM
#7
Team Owner
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 36,474
Received 249 Likes
on
175 Posts
Originally posted by quikcls
the only stangs that yyou have any competion with are the late model one's with 260hp
the only stangs that yyou have any competion with are the late model one's with 260hp
But i'm telling you I stayed right with this guy from 40-90ish where I started to gain on him and he was still pulling hard.
Trending Topics
10-19-2003, 10:49 PM
#8
Blown LS6!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bellevue, WA
Age: 51
Posts: 1,993
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mrsteve
The '94-'95 have 260 hp. I don't know about the '96-'98's. I'm pretty sure the late model '99- have more than 260 stock.
But i'm telling you I stayed right with this guy from 40-90ish where I started to gain on him and he was still pulling hard.
The '94-'95 have 260 hp. I don't know about the '96-'98's. I'm pretty sure the late model '99- have more than 260 stock.
But i'm telling you I stayed right with this guy from 40-90ish where I started to gain on him and he was still pulling hard.
10-20-2003, 05:59 AM
#10
Race Director
Originally posted by mrsteve
The '94-'95 have 260 hp. I don't know about the '96-'98's. I'm pretty sure the late model '99- have more than 260 stock.
The '94-'95 have 260 hp. I don't know about the '96-'98's. I'm pretty sure the late model '99- have more than 260 stock.
10-20-2003, 06:08 AM
#11
Race Director
Originally posted by quikcls
the only stangs that yyou have any competion with are the late model one's with 260hp
the only stangs that yyou have any competion with are the late model one's with 260hp
?
10-20-2003, 07:30 AM
#12
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Chaptorial
The 86-'93 5.0-standards had 205hp stock. In 94-'95 they had 215hp stock. The 96-'98's GT's have/had 215hp stock. From '99 till today the GT's have 260hp stock.
The 86-'93 5.0-standards had 205hp stock. In 94-'95 they had 215hp stock. The 96-'98's GT's have/had 215hp stock. From '99 till today the GT's have 260hp stock.
Assuming both cars are stock, a race between a 94-98 GT and a CLS is dead even in my book. For the 1/4 all are high 14 second cars.
99+ GTs and 96-98 Cobras have a definite edge over a CLS though.
Pre 94 (foxbody) stangs aren't really worth arguing over as there are so few that are either (a) stock or (b) running up to original power if still truly stock.
10-20-2003, 08:10 AM
#13
Quicker than U Think
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jupiter, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pull_T
The 98s were rated at 225...everything else is spot on.
Assuming both cars are stock, a race between a 94-98 GT and a CLS is dead even in my book. For the 1/4 all are high 14 second cars.
99+ GTs and 96-98 Cobras have a definite edge over a CLS though.
Pre 94 (foxbody) stangs aren't really worth arguing over as there are so few that are either (a) stock or (b) running up to original power if still truly stock.
The 98s were rated at 225...everything else is spot on.
Assuming both cars are stock, a race between a 94-98 GT and a CLS is dead even in my book. For the 1/4 all are high 14 second cars.
99+ GTs and 96-98 Cobras have a definite edge over a CLS though.
Pre 94 (foxbody) stangs aren't really worth arguing over as there are so few that are either (a) stock or (b) running up to original power if still truly stock.
BTW nice run.
10-20-2003, 09:29 AM
#14
Senior Moderator
If the CL-S auto is as quick as my 2K2 Max SE (if not, slightly quicker), then it shouldnt have any problems with a 94-95 GT. I lost to one @ ET by 1/10 second and his GT was modded versus my stock Maxima. Come to think of it, the 94-95 GT (stock) would have its hands full against a CL-P.
If we were talking 99+ GT or 96+ Cobra, then it would be a completely different story.
Peace.
If we were talking 99+ GT or 96+ Cobra, then it would be a completely different story.
Peace.
10-20-2003, 12:48 PM
#15
Quicker than U Think
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jupiter, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by F23A4
If the CL-S auto is as quick as my 2K2 Max SE (if not, slightly quicker), then it shouldnt have any problems with a 94-95 GT. I lost to one @ ET by 1/10 second and his GT was modded versus my stock Maxima. Come to think of it, the 94-95 GT (stock) would have its hands full against a CL-P.
If we were talking 99+ GT or 96+ Cobra, then it would be a completely different story.
Peace.
If the CL-S auto is as quick as my 2K2 Max SE (if not, slightly quicker), then it shouldnt have any problems with a 94-95 GT. I lost to one @ ET by 1/10 second and his GT was modded versus my stock Maxima. Come to think of it, the 94-95 GT (stock) would have its hands full against a CL-P.
If we were talking 99+ GT or 96+ Cobra, then it would be a completely different story.
Peace.
Maybe a 96-98 4.6s, but not a 94-95 5.0, even the heavy SN95 5.0s were high 14 sec cars when well driven. A stock well driven CLS would most likely lose to a 94-95 GT Stang, but it would be close enough to call a drivers race.
I hope your Max is a stick, because there is no way an auto Maxima should even be close to a 94-95 Stang. I know the manual tranny cars were very quick, but the autos were dogs in comparison.
10-20-2003, 01:10 PM
#16
Senior Moderator
Originally posted by GS Dave
LOL 94-95 Stang having its hand full with a CLP??? I don't think so Tim. Maybe a 96-98 4.6s, but not a 94-95 5.0, even the heavy SN95 5.0s were high 14 sec cars when well driven.
A stock well driven CLS would most likely lose to a 94-95 GT Stang, but it would be close enough to call a drivers race.
I hope your Max is a stick, because there is no way an auto Maxima should even be close to a 94-95 Stang. I know the manual tranny cars were very quick, but the autos were dogs in comparison.
LOL 94-95 Stang having its hand full with a CLP??? I don't think so Tim.
Maybe a 96-98 4.6s, but not a 94-95 5.0, even the heavy SN95 5.0s were high 14 sec cars when well driven. A stock well driven CLS would most likely lose to a 94-95 GT Stang, but it would be close enough to call a drivers race.
I hope your Max is a stick, because there is no way an auto Maxima should even be close to a 94-95 Stang. I know the manual tranny cars were very quick, but the autos were dogs in comparison.
And yes. My Max is a 4sp auto (sig posted w/ best 1/4 time - Stock).
Peace.
10-20-2003, 01:27 PM
#17
Quicker than U Think
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jupiter, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, you ran that time with the auto? I'm impressed. I know the sticks are supposed to run that quick, but I didn't think the autos did. I've ran an auto once, and it wasn't even funny. He ran a 15.9 to my 14.9(2700ft elevation). That would probably put him at around 15.4 at sea level.
As for your run with the 99+. Not to belittle your victory, but the guy probably could not drive. The 99+ GT should run no slower than 14.5, with most in the low 14s. Then again, on the street, anything can and will happen.
As for your run with the 99+. Not to belittle your victory, but the guy probably could not drive. The 99+ GT should run no slower than 14.5, with most in the low 14s. Then again, on the street, anything can and will happen.
10-20-2003, 01:55 PM
#18
RIP Red-CL
Join Date: Dec 2002
Age: 37
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mrsteve
I have a friend with a '94 or '95 GT. Those have the 5.0. He has an intake and flowmasters. Also he removed the cats. I've never run him before. Might have to try when he gets home from school.
I have a friend with a '94 or '95 GT. Those have the 5.0. He has an intake and flowmasters. Also he removed the cats. I've never run him before. Might have to try when he gets home from school.
10-20-2003, 04:55 PM
#19
Race Director
I was waiting for Pull_T to show up. 
Never mess with 5.0's after their modded. Stock they can be fair game, modded you don't know what the hell your lining up against. 
Originally posted by thealliance15
he will rip u in half never mess with 5.0's
he will rip u in half never mess with 5.0's
10-20-2003, 07:29 PM
#20
TQ > MPG
Okay, here's a quick rundown:
87-93 GT 5 speed - mid 14's
87-93 GT Auto - High14's/ Low 15's
94/95 GT 5 speed - High 14's
94/95 GT Auto - Mid 15's
96/98 GT 5 speed - Low 15's
96/98 GT Auto - Mid/High 15's
99+ GT 5 speed - Low 14's
99+ GT Auto - Mid 14's
Now, of course some run slower and some run faster, but these are what I have witnessed at the trakc as the average for a decent driver. If it's a convertible subtract about 2-3 tenths from those times.
Here's a breakdown of the hp/tq for each yr:
87-92 5.0L - 225hp/300tq
93 GT 5.0L - 205hp/275tq
94/95 GT - 215hp/285tq
96/97GT - 215hp/285tq
98GT - 225hp/290tq
99+ GT - 260hp/302tq
It's hard to know what a Mustang will run, because it could be a bone stock mid 15 sec car, or a modded 12 sec ride. You won't know till you race usually.
I went from 14.9 @ 92mph with only timing & air filter in my 94 GT to low 14's @ 98mph with only exhaust, gears, and drag radials. There is so much stuff available to make them fast for cheap it's not even funny.
87-93 GT 5 speed - mid 14's
87-93 GT Auto - High14's/ Low 15's
94/95 GT 5 speed - High 14's
94/95 GT Auto - Mid 15's
96/98 GT 5 speed - Low 15's
96/98 GT Auto - Mid/High 15's
99+ GT 5 speed - Low 14's
99+ GT Auto - Mid 14's
Now, of course some run slower and some run faster, but these are what I have witnessed at the trakc as the average for a decent driver. If it's a convertible subtract about 2-3 tenths from those times.
Here's a breakdown of the hp/tq for each yr:
87-92 5.0L - 225hp/300tq
93 GT 5.0L - 205hp/275tq
94/95 GT - 215hp/285tq
96/97GT - 215hp/285tq
98GT - 225hp/290tq
99+ GT - 260hp/302tq
It's hard to know what a Mustang will run, because it could be a bone stock mid 15 sec car, or a modded 12 sec ride. You won't know till you race usually.
I went from 14.9 @ 92mph with only timing & air filter in my 94 GT to low 14's @ 98mph with only exhaust, gears, and drag radials. There is so much stuff available to make them fast for cheap it's not even funny.
10-21-2003, 05:32 AM
#21
Senior Moderator
Originally posted by GS Dave
As for your run with the 99+. Not to belittle your victory, but the guy probably could not drive. The 99+ GT should run no slower than 14.5, with most in the low 14s. Then again, on the street, anything can and will happen.
As for your run with the 99+. Not to belittle your victory, but the guy probably could not drive. The 99+ GT should run no slower than 14.5, with most in the low 14s. Then again, on the street, anything can and will happen.
But your point is well taken; I know a well driven 99+ GT (5sp or auto) could take my Maxima.
Peace
10-21-2003, 05:40 AM
#22
Senior Moderator
Originally posted by jtkz13
It's hard to know what a Mustang will run, because it could be a bone stock mid 15 sec car, or a modded 12 sec ride. You won't know till you race usually.
It's hard to know what a Mustang will run, because it could be a bone stock mid 15 sec car, or a modded 12 sec ride. You won't know till you race usually.
As we were both going to Blockbuster Video, I struck up a conversation with him where he told me that he ran a best time of 12.85et on street tires. He indicated that he changed the intake and gears only. (obviously, it seems that he would have torn past me whether I was in my minivan or Maxima
)Peace.
10-21-2003, 05:48 AM
#23
Yeehaw
Originally posted by F23A4
No argument here!! I could hear the guy crunching his gears with each shift trying to: a) not get beat by an import family sedan and b) not get embarrassed in front of his girl (riding shotgun). In this instance, he failed @ both.
But your point is well taken; I know a well driven 99+ GT (5sp or auto) could take my Maxima.
Peace
No argument here!! I could hear the guy crunching his gears with each shift trying to: a) not get beat by an import family sedan and b) not get embarrassed in front of his girl (riding shotgun). In this instance, he failed @ both.
But your point is well taken; I know a well driven 99+ GT (5sp or auto) could take my Maxima.
Peace
was his girl a chubby...that could have been his problem...
for a 94 stang problem could just be that its getting a little old. I had a 94 gt before my cls, and it definitely slowed down over the years. they just don't run the same with 140k miles on them...
10-21-2003, 11:20 AM
#25
RIP Red-CL
Join Date: Dec 2002
Age: 37
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by fuzzy02CLS
My co-worker has a stock 02 GT convertable. He's dieing to race me. He says his car seems slow though compared to other stock Mustangs.
My co-worker has a stock 02 GT convertable. He's dieing to race me. He says his car seems slow though compared to other stock Mustangs.
10-21-2003, 11:20 AM
#26
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by F23A4
he told me that he ran a best time of 12.85et on street tires. He indicated that he changed the intake and gears only.
he told me that he ran a best time of 12.85et on street tires. He indicated that he changed the intake and gears only.
No way he ran a 12.8 on street tires with just gears and intake unless you consider a blower or a nitrous solenoid "intake" mods...
10-21-2003, 11:43 AM
#27
Quicker than U Think
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jupiter, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by thealliance15
rip him in half
rip him in half
10-21-2003, 12:04 PM
#28
Senior Moderator
Originally posted by Pull_T
Doesn;t really jive.
No way he ran a 12.8 on street tires with just gears and intake unless you consider a blower or a nitrous solenoid "intake" mods...
Doesn;t really jive.
No way he ran a 12.8 on street tires with just gears and intake unless you consider a blower or a nitrous solenoid "intake" mods...
I'm MUCH more familiar with Honda and Nissan mods.
10-21-2003, 12:19 PM
#29
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by F23A4
I don't know a thing about modifying Stangs; I just nodded my head and said "really!" but was thinking "whatever".
I'm MUCH more familiar with Honda and Nissan mods.
I don't know a thing about modifying Stangs; I just nodded my head and said "really!" but was thinking "whatever".
I'm MUCH more familiar with Honda and Nissan mods.
10-21-2003, 03:08 PM
#31
Race Director
Originally posted by fuzzy02CLS
My co-worker has a stock 02 GT convertable. He's dieing to race me. He says his car seems slow though compared to other stock Mustangs.
My co-worker has a stock 02 GT convertable. He's dieing to race me. He says his car seems slow though compared to other stock Mustangs.
10-22-2003, 11:51 AM
#38
Senior Moderator
drawing from memory, weren't the 94-95 Cobras rated at 240hp?!?
10-22-2003, 12:25 PM
#39
Advanced
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: nj
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude!! Fresh from the dealership (after having my MAF sensor replaced) @ the light 1/2 block from the dealership, I had a runin with a 99+ GT (5speed judging from the body lanquage) after he revved on me. I beat him by a 1/2 car length on a half mile distance (to the next light). And I'm positive the 99+ GT is quicker than the 94-95 GT.
Sweet 1/4 mile times in your sig.
The guy with the stang was telling you some serious horse crap. I don't think I could hit 12.8 with Dr's and as you can see from my sig, I have about every bolt on possible.
EDIT- the 94-95's were 240. They are only a few tenths off a 96-98 in the 1/4. I test drove a 95 before my 97 and couldn't feel any difference. But the 5.0's are sooo much easier and cheaper to mod.
10-22-2003, 12:36 PM
#40
Instructor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: DFW,TX area
Age: 50
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by GS Dave
LOL 94-95 Stang having its hand full with a CLP??? I don't think so Tim. Maybe a 96-98 4.6s, but not a 94-95 5.0, even the heavy SN95 5.0s were high 14 sec cars when well driven.
A stock well driven CLS would most likely lose to a 94-95 GT Stang, but it would be close enough to call a drivers race.
I hope your Max is a stick, because there is no way an auto Maxima should even be close to a 94-95 Stang. I know the manual tranny cars were very quick, but the autos were dogs in comparison.
LOL 94-95 Stang having its hand full with a CLP??? I don't think so Tim.
Maybe a 96-98 4.6s, but not a 94-95 5.0, even the heavy SN95 5.0s were high 14 sec cars when well driven. A stock well driven CLS would most likely lose to a 94-95 GT Stang, but it would be close enough to call a drivers race.
I hope your Max is a stick, because there is no way an auto Maxima should even be close to a 94-95 Stang. I know the manual tranny cars were very quick, but the autos were dogs in comparison.
