JR4444

A stock Formula 350 or a 5-Speed 5.0 Stang? I think the 350 was, because in all the magazines they compare the 5-speed 305 to the 5.0, and the Mustang always won, but not by a lot.

oops wrong "Which"

[This message has been edited by JR4444 (edited December 01, 2001).]

fly89gta

iTrader: (1)

depends, if the person in the stang can drive a stick...i'd give the edge to the stang

------------------
*89 Trans Am GTA
*Moderator at www.transamgta.com

To hell with the GM vs Ford war. We must unite, as brothers to fight the plague that is overtaking the world...RICE

Tony

JaysZee

It depends on which Mustang. Hot Rod managed a 14.16 with a stripped LX 5.0 5-spd, loaded GT's were quite a bit slower. The best they did with a L98 was a 14.6

------------------

1991 5.7L Z28
14.43 @ 96.16 MPH

CODY BEHNKE

The 88 L98's didn't seem to impresive stock I hate Mustangs but I think it would win 87 & 88 was one of the fastest Mustangs.

DiecastZ28

I don't like fords, but I do think that the mustang is a nice car. I prolly wouldnt buy one, but if i was giving one, it would be a different story

------------------
1985 Camaro Z28
305
5-speed Transmission
Flowmaster Exhaust
4 barrel carb
8mm wires
Kenwood 600 amp
Sony Deck
4 6x9 Jenson Speakers
2 4x6 Polk Audio
2 10" JL w0 Subwoofers

MyStang'95

The Stang. Being a high-school kid I've seen a few races with those exact cars(stock) and the stang always pulls.

------------------
1995 Mustang GT 5spd
Window Tint
Chrome-Dipped 16's
Bridgestone Potenzas
Pro 5.0 Shifter
Ford 3.55 Gears
Ford 9mm Wires
Ford Underdrive Pulleys
K&N
BBK O/R H-Pipe
Optima Red Cap

Mustang5L5

My roommate freshman year of college had a 88 IROC 5.7L. We used to joke around over who would win and such. We always said it would be a good race.

Well, one day we actually did it. At the time both of us only had exhaust work done to our cars. I won that race...but not by much to really brag about. I would imagine a 5-spd being a little quicker.

87-88 were the fastest STOCK year for the 5.0's

------------------
Mike
--Black '88 Mustang LX 5.0L AOD--
BBK Headers, Off-Road H-pipe, MAC 2.5" Cat-back exhaust, UD Pulleys
3.73's, FMS "C" Springs, Tokico Shocks,
'93 Pony rims, Saleen Spoiler
5-spd swap VERY soon

-14.42 @ 98MPH (w/ 2.4 60-footer)-

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

I could see that race go either way in certain conditions. Also obviously depending how the guy in the M*****g can shift. This is where a Trans-Go Shift Kit would be useful for the IROC-Z or Formula. The 5.7 would most likely win off the line and for the 1st part of the race, and the 5.0 would most likely pull away after a while. Maybe.

------------------
89 RS
STILL Looking For:
An 87 IROC-Z28 350 TPI

Yeah I have an RS, but I want an IROC-Z!!

[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited December 02, 2001).]

cort351w

Why? What was different than say in 93? (My friend's brother has a 93 GT.)

SoCo80p

iTrader: (5)

hands down the mustang was faster then the f-body in the 80's. that was the only decade the the mustang was better then the f-body

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

No, they weren't always faster 82-92. It went back and forth. They weren't "better" either.

[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited December 03, 2001).]

Mustang5L5

Not much. When I say the 87-88's were faster, i mean probably 0.1 second or so.

The reason is because the 87-88's use a Speed Density system and a more aggressive cam design. In 89, the switched to Mass Air which has a restictive inlet and changed the camshaft. Over the years, they kept changing the cam (slightly weaker) and I think in 1990 they changed the types of cats which were a bit more restrictive. There's not much of a HP difference but in general the 87-88 Speed Density cars were hard running cars. But the 89-93's were only 1 mod away from closing up the gap.

But who leave their Mustang stock anymore? Us Speed Density guys need to upgrade to Mass Air anyway when we start getting into serious mod. I have my Mass Air conversion waiting to go in when i intall My Cobra intake 24# injectors and a cam



------------------
Mike
--Black '88 Mustang LX 5.0L AOD--
BBK Headers, Off-Road H-pipe, MAC 2.5" Cat-back exhaust, UD Pulleys
3.73's, FMS "C" Springs, Tokico Shocks,
'93 Pony rims, Saleen Spoiler
5-spd swap VERY soon

-14.42 @ 98MPH (w/ 2.4 60-footer)-

JR4444

The one thing I personally can't understand is how the F-body stang can be fast. The reason I say this is because the only stang I know of personally is my friend's 88' GT. He has done 24# Injectors, Underdrive pullies, Headers to X-pipe (no cats), flowmaster mufflers, Cobra intake, ported heads, full racing ingnition, bigger Thtottle body, TB spacer and the list goes on and on. The thing I can not figure out is why he only runs a 14.9??? And that was with me driving, he personally can only manage a 15.2. From looking at the Sigs of the Mustang guys on this board, my friend should easily be running low 13's. The only excuse he has for it being so slow is because it's a convertable, and the top doesn't snap down completely. So if anybody has any reasons, guesses or opionions about this feel free to express them, because me personally I don't have a clue.

cort351w

Why do mustangs of past and present use several small cats instead of one or two decent sized ones? However, looking at my brother's friend's 93 GT, I noticed that cats are used to turn the corner from headers (in his case) to under the car--that's kind of clever, although I'm not sure it's the greatest for flow.

JR4444

[This message has been edited by JR4444 (edited December 03, 2001).]

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

LOL at fly89gta's sig. It's like this, American Muscle comes together to go against ricers, while still going against each other at the same time.

LincolnHawk

the fastest/best built mustang was the 85 cobra

Perry93TransAm

I think if the F-body was a non t-top low option car and had the performance rear axle the Camaro or Formula would win, I have seen bone stock iroc 350s and Formula 350s with the 3.23 rear gears run very low 14s at 1500 ft elevation. The Notchback is the ringer here since a low optioned 5 speed one with the 3.08s should match that easily (with a good driver), But GTS and hatchs (also convertibles ) would be hard pressed to win , but I think the races are close. I had an 87 GTA , low optioned witht the 305 TPI (190 hp motor) with exhaust, SLP filter system (intake bellows), and a 160 degree stat, and I raced stangs every chance I could get, I allways beat stock convertibles pretty good and always lost to 87 and up anything else by a car length (everytime 1 stinking car length..lol) But when I added some 1.6 to 1 rockers to the motor and ported the plenum I started edging out and sometimes beating the stangs(still lost every once in a while). So I think the 350 cars would have fared much better.
Perry

Mustang5L5

JR4444, do you remember what MPH
he was making at the end of each run? GT convertibles are HEAVY. They weigh in at about 3700 pounds or so with driver. It may be a tuning issue, but it could also be the shear bulk of the car. Is i AOD, or a 5-spd? If he doesn't have gears in his car yet, he should. Those heavy verts need to be geared low to get it moving.

As for the exhaust, yeah, the design does prove to be very restrictive. A lot of people cut out the first 2 cats which are really pre-cats. The other 2 are the main cats and they are horrible also. Off-road H-pipes are a popular mod for good reason.


Also, there was never an 85 Cobra. There was a '79 Cobra and an '80 Cobra and then te '93-up Cobras, but no 85. I canada, thy do a weird thing and called the 3rd gen GT's Cobras. There was a small sticker on the hatch that said COBRA. But t was th same car as a normal GT

------------------
Mike
--Black '88 Mustang LX 5.0L AOD--
BBK Headers, Off-Road H-pipe, MAC 2.5" Cat-back exhaust, UD Pulleys
3.73's, FMS "C" Springs, Tokico Shocks,
'93 Pony rims, Saleen Spoiler
5-spd swap VERY soon

-14.42 @ 98MPH (w/ 2.4 60-footer)-

Nic

Sounds like a tuning issue to me.

12sMustang

There are a few misconceptions about the mustang in this thread:

First the MAF system did not reduce HP significantly. Maybe 2-3 hp because they didn't use a big enough MAF. I believe that the MAF was only 58mm while the TB was 60mm. This cause a bottle neck before the intake.

The restrictive inlet does not have to do with the Mass Air system. In fact, with less than 30 simple minutes of work, you can take it out and gain 5-7 hp. Also, some late-year 88s had that Air silencer(as it's more commonly known) and this would have the same effect on the Speed density cars.

The Camshaft profile in '90 was another 3-5 hp.

In 1993 the mustang's rated hp dropped from 225 to 205. This was because of all the small revisions that happened over the years, combined with the way that they selected mustangs to test. To my knowledge the only mechanical difference between a 92 and a 93 was the change from forged pistons to hypereutectic(sp?), which if anything would have increased hp slightly.



What years were the F-bodies faster? I know that from 87 on, they certainly were not faster. I'm not sure about prior to that, but I think that the 4 cyl turbo mustangs were quicker, too. That would leave what? 85 and 86? In '85 stang were rated at 210 hp, and in 86 at 200. Unless I'm wrong about the turbo mustangs, I don't think that there was a year between 82-92 that F-bodies outran mustangs.

I've done a lot of work on mustangs and would be happy to help, but if your buddy has all those mods, then he's got a SERIOUS problem. I ran a 14.2 with only a K&N and glasspack mufflers. That is one sick puppy, but I don't have enough to go off of. Tell me any problems it's having. Show me a timeslip, and give me any info that I can use to figure out what's up. I'd imagine that could tell from driving it what is wrong, but that car should be about 2 seconds faster than it is. Also, you didn't mention a cam. Does he have a cam in it?

Wrong.. Not even close. In fact, I support one of the posts above. I don't think that there was an 85 Cobra. I think that the fastest non-R cobra from the factory was probably a toss up between the 69-70 428SCJ w/ 4.30 gears or the brand spankin' new Mustang Cobra coupes. Nobody rush to your magazines to tell me that the 428 Mach 1 ran 14.xx because the SCJ was a limited production mustang. From the factory low 13s were possible, but with simple tweaking and today's tires 12s would've been possible. New cobras can run low 13s. I've heard about 'em running 13.3s from friends at my local track(I'm at college).

Racnoth

No Corba in 85....maybe SVO's...the turbo 4's, but no Cobra...

12sMustang

nope no turbo 4s either in 85. That's why the 5.0 was bumped to 210.

Chris

JR4444

My freind's stang is a 5-speed, it has 3.83 in the rear and I think with all the crap he has on it, it probably weighs 4000+ I'm not sure about the cam I'll have to ask him. He also converted to MAF from Speed density. He's a mechanic and we have tried to adjust the timing and tune it, but nothing seems to help. One of these days we'll really get into it and find the problem... he personally is always working on his 12 second El Cameno so he doesn't spend that much time on the stang anymore.

------------------
88 Formula 350 WS6
Upper and Lower SuperRam, 1000 CFM Accel Throttle Body, ZZ4 cam, 24# Motorsport Injectors, Larger Gutted Mass Sensor, Homemade Cold Air induction, Custom Burned PROM, MSD 6a box, MSD Distributor, Accel SuperCoil, Taylor 8mm wires, TB Bypass, B&M shift Kit, 160* Thermostat, Flowmaster Muffler

Headers in the mail soon to be installed

IROCKZ4me

I may as well pitch in:

Wrong, the Mustang SVO was available in 84, 85, and 86.
They all had the turbocharged 2.3L 4 pot.
84-85 SVO = 175 HP
85 1/2 SVO = 205 HP
86 SVO = 200 HP

<hr>

As far as the F-body VS FOX body thing goes, It could have, and did go either way depending on the car and driver.
I was in the middle of my "punk street racer" haydays back then and so were nearly all of my friends. I witnessed (and may admit to having participated if the statute of limitations is up, LOL) a lot of races between these cars when they were brand new and fresh. I saw a lot of mustangs win, but I saw more 5.7 (350) F bodies win.
Counting driving aside, the F bodies did not all run the same. A lot were just average. Some were slugs, and some ran like a scalded ****-ant. As someone mentioned above, a low optioned, hard top, formula could beat a stang.
All it really took was a lighter version, like a hardtop car (non Delco Bose, non power accesories, etc. didn't hurt either) with posi/performance axle and a 350. Being even lighter like a formula was just that much better. The 5.0 (305) just didn't have enough grunt to haul that heavy F body, but the 350 could as long as the car wasn't too heavily optioned and it ran right. It didn't hurt and you could stretch out your lead more if you forgot (oops) and left your spare tire, jack, 10 pounds of coins from the console etc, at home and you only had 1/4 or so tank of gas.

It also made a difference if you only weighed 150 pounds or so and the guy driving the stang weighed 275, or the other way around.

Once you start modifying it can be anyones game.

Of course more races were won or lost because of the driver, not the car.

------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

EFI Performance Club on Yahoo



[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited December 03, 2001).]

IROCZTWENTYGR8

iTrader: (1)

Is there any site that has M*****g specs 82-92?? I can't ever find any. Ours are on the main page of this site in the Tech Data section if u guys want to compare. As far as top model HP and TQ, don't all of your cars have 225HP and 300TQ from 87-92??

L98 350 5.7 TPI: (Camaro Specs)
87: 225HP 330TQ
88: 230HP 330TQ
89: 240HP 345TQ
90: 245HP 345TQ
91: 245HP 345TQ
92: 245HP 345TQ

GM also always rates their cars specs and performance ability less than what they really are and can really do.



[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited December 03, 2001).]

Mustang5L5

1979:
140 BHP 250 TQ 4-spd
143 BHP 245TQ Auto

2.3L Turbo no info

1980-81 : (4.2L) no info..but they were weak


1982:
157HP 240TQ 4-spd
(Automatics came with 4.2L rated lower)

1983:
175HP 275TQ 4-spd/5-spd
(Automatics came with lower powered 5.0L)
2.3L TurboGT 145HP 180TQ

1984:
175HP 275TQ 5-spd
165HP 275TQ Auto
Turbo GT 145HP 180TQ
SVO 2.3L 175HP 210TQ


1985:
210HP 270 TQ 5-spd
180HP 260TQ Auto
SVO 2.3L 175HP 210TQ

1985.5
SVO 2.3L 205HP 240 TQ

1986:
200HP 285TQ
2.3L SVO 200HP 240TQ

1987-93:
225HP 300TQ



------------------
Mike
--Black '88 Mustang LX 5.0L AOD--
BBK Headers, Off-Road H-pipe, MAC 2.5" Cat-back exhaust, UD Pulleys
3.73's, FMS "C" Springs, Tokico Shocks,
'93 Pony rims, Saleen Spoiler
5-spd swap VERY soon

-14.42 @ 98MPH (w/ 2.4 60-footer)-

[This message has been edited by Mustang5L5 (edited December 03, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Mustang5L5 (edited December 03, 2001).]

JR4444

L98 350 5.7 TPI: (Camaro Specs)
87: 225HP 330TQ
88: 230HP 330TQ
89: 240HP 345TQ
90: 245HP 345TQ

I thought they changed the HP in 88, not 89. I thought the engine was exactly the same in 88 and 89, If not let me know what they changed.


------------------
88 Formula 350 WS6
Upper and Lower SuperRam, 1000 CFM Accel Throttle Body, ZZ4 cam, 24# Motorsport Injectors, Larger Gutted Mass Sensor, Homemade Cold Air induction, Custom Burned PROM, MSD 6a box, MSD Distributor, Accel SuperCoil, Taylor 8mm wires, TB Bypass, B&M shift Kit, 160* Thermostat, Flowmaster Muffler

Headers in the mail soon to be installed

12sMustang

2 things: 1) You're right about the SVO 4cyl turbo. I was thinking about GTs. There are no 85 TurboGTs. Prior to that there were.

2) Not all mustangs from 87-92 had 225hp/300lbs-ft TQ. in 93 they were rated at 205, but the only mechanical difference that I know of was the use of hypereutectic pistons which were lighter and if anything should have help power. Anyway, the loss of power was due to new testing. In 1987 the mustang was indeed 225 hp, but in some of the 88 5.0s they installed air intake silencers, and in the california stangs they used MAFs. The silencer restricted air and caused a proven loss of 5-7 hp. The MAF caused a loss of about 3 hp. This was because it was a bottleneck in the intake system. The MAF was 58mm while the TB was 60. A new cam profile in 90 also brought down hp by 3-5 and some exhaust changes (different cats) brought hp down as well. Although the modifications happened throughout the span from 87-93 they were not reflected until 93. So if I had to put figures for the years it would look like this:

87: 225/300
88: 225/300 except for MAF and silencer cars
89: 215/290
90: 210-212/285
And I don't know exactly when they changed the cats.

Chris

jdhommert

How exactly does the 5.0 302 hang/pull on a 5.7 350? Is it the High Output?

------------------
no car, just savin for a fbody, i am 16 not to much money, I am shooting for a late 80's early 90's 350, iroc or z28.

Mustang5L5

All 5.0L in Mustangs were high output. How does it hang with them? Well, maybe a GT vert won't hang with them, but the lightweight LX notchback (around 3000 pounds) with a stick could hang with the heavier 5.7L. What is the weight on one of those? The HP/TQ numbers are not that far off and that is when little things come into play like who gets traction, can the 5-spd guy shift, etc.


12sMustang. As far as I know, they started putting the air silencer in right fron 1986. My friend's 87GT had a silencer and my speed density '88 had a Silencer. It's true that is cost a few HP, but all cars had them. It was the first thing to get yanked out!



------------------
Mike
--Black '88 Mustang LX 5.0L AOD--
BBK Headers, Off-Road H-pipe, MAC 2.5" Cat-back exhaust, UD Pulleys
3.73's, FMS "C" Springs, Tokico Shocks,
'93 Pony rims, Saleen Spoiler
5-spd swap VERY soon

-14.42 @ 98MPH (w/ 2.4 60-footer)-

12sMustang

Ok, maybe you're right. What, then, was the "restrictive inlet" you refer to?

Chris

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

i think the main thing with teh mustangs it that they are lighter and many of them have 5 speeds. if GM would have put teh 5speed behind their 350, i think the story would have been much different, much much different . and i can also attest to the F-body cars runnin way different from eachother. some are absolute turds, and some are real ringers. i think i have a ringer. my 86 IROC has outrun 2 pretty nice 350 tpi cars, slaughtered another stock 86 iroc. and i smoked a 91 Z28 (5.0 auto) with gears, cam, and other small stuff. and you can see my mods in my sig. i also beat my buddies 402 4speed chevelle, and a truck wiht a 468 bbc. my car just seems to run good. cant wait to do my stuff this winter

------------------
86 IROC
43,000 miles
305/700R4/3.23 gears
maroon, gold stickers, black interior, T-Tops.

current mods.
shift kit
headers
cat back exhaust

mods planned for this winter
cam
Adjustable fuel pressure regulator
port and polish intake and heads
lookin to run low 14s maybe squeak out a 13.9 with my stock chip