NeVeRLiFt
Founding Member
FastDriver said:5spd GT,
I don't have time to do it, now. When I get back tomorrow, though, I'm going to rip your ass apart.
Regards,
Chris
I......uh......nah, to easy.FastDriver said:5spd GT,
I don't have time to do it, now. When I get back tomorrow, though, I'm going to rip your ass apart.
Regards,
Chris
5spd GT said:Exactly...except I believe it would be almost a tie up top...
Now let me requote something...
"The "bottom line" is that (looking at this from the most extreme angle- '87 vs. '98)...that your possibly looking at an 11 yr. old difference between the cars and technology of how the engine actual works...a considerable difference between a pushrod engine (minus the ls1 pushrod ) and the SOHC design of the 96+ 4.6...your looking at a car (1987) that is more likely out of tune and has some rust or just some worn out parts...compared to the 98...but this is not always true...and this is why you see that the races would be VERY CLOSE...because the age defining difference..."
the torque is not that big of a difference to reason why it would win...
The engine in 96-98 were fine...just they didn't have the 99+ PI heads and intake (and the cam...which didn't make that much more power over the 96-98)...
you can add all that on there pretty quickly and cheaper than the mentioned h/c/i on a 5.0 and get a nice little ride...(about 250-260rwhp)...with some little bolt-ons here and there...the 4.6 aftermarket is catching up...we say that a lot...now it is time for people to believe it...
5spd GT said:and same running condition...the reason why a 98 gt can run with the 5.0 is because it is usually based on condition also...
5spd GT said:If you have read what I have put in my posts...you will see that age is the only definative reason...but it contributes...and in the most extreme case (87 vs. 98)...the 87 has 11 more years of POSSIBLE...wear and tear on it...that is a reason why most people drive newer vehicles than older...because they USUALLY are in better condition...not always...the 4.6 does stand a chance with everything being equal in condition, gears, equal drivers and tranny...but the edge goes to the 5.0...I have drove all...93 5.0, 95 gt, 97gt, and 2000 GT...only owned the first and last one...and their is a chance...
5spd GT said:Half a second is owned?...look at the mph...is their 5mph difference?...no... ...I look at mph to show true power and potential...not the E.T....though it provides a good comparison...a car (5.0) with a lower torque powerband and being in a lighter car will get him off the line and the 4.6 has to play catch up and doesn't quite have the power to catch up...so the 5.0 is usually declared the winner...but they both provide equal mph numbers...
In response to the weight...my freinds 90 gt weighs less than my hatch...Gt's weigh on average no more than 80-100 lbs more...
Again it would be close...with the edge going to the 5.0...
5spd GT said:With your mods...you will lose to a 99+ GT as long as it is a 5spd...race to a 100 and see what happens...not to 40...I've owned both...I know what they both can do stock...and race somebody that knows how to drive better...because it appears you can drive pretty good...
5spd GT said:I still can't believe the guys that think a 99+ Gt will lose to a stock 5.0 ...or even a slightly "boltedon" car...
To anybody that believes that...LOOK AT THE MPH...it shows the true power...not stoplight to stoplight races...
5spd GT said:On the 99+ v6 beating the 96-98 gt half the time...NO...it will run right with it though...but it will end up losing...you can't overcome the torque factor...even with the v6's having the 327's with the 5spd
Millhouse...your the exception ...your car don't count...or your driving skill...
If you say it enough times, it might make it true.The 5.0 does not totally own the 96-98 4.6...it is a close race...with the 5.0 having the edge...
To many people are also considering NOTCH vs. 96 fully loaded gt... ...GT vs. GT...should be considered...hence: equal trim...
5spd GT said:I think "people"...need to express the weight difference more than the 5.0 being the almighty engine and making tons of more torque and this and that...I think the weight between a notch vs. a loaded 96-98gt is more of a factor than the SLIGHT power difference...
5spd GT said:FastDriver - So you said the fastest stock 5.0 to ever run was a 13.8 and then you said the average 5spd 96-98 Gt runs mid 14's...
your going to have to be more consistent...
984.6gt ran a high 13 with some sort of exhaust and drag radials I beleive...and that is just one guy I remember off hand...
A 99+ Gt will beat any stock 5.0 coupe vs. coupe...no questions asked...you got to have equal driver skill though...so your wrong...
Quit looking at E.T's to determine the faster car...look at the mph...go over to the 4.6 forum and start spreading this " " and they'll laugh you right out of there...
The simple fact is that I have owned both...drove every newer model mustang from 87+ (lx's to gt to cobra's) except a 03/04 Cobra and have owned both a 5.0 and 99+ GT...the 99+ Gt beat it modified with gears, full exhaust, and couple bolt-ons...with the same driver (me)...
Thanks for putting words in my mouth.The 5.0 can never lose huh?
Engines make torque REGARDLESS of speed.87'GTstang said:Since when has high-end torque ever been something to consider for an engine period? Torque is mainly important downlow and somwhere in the middle of the RPM band the two trade off and the built-up hp takes over and builds until the engine starts running out of air. The 5.0 was kknow as a "stump puller" - it was a torque monster and made gobs of it. Any modular engine by history has not been known as torque monsters, but high-revving hp engines. This is the tradeoff by technology. Given an equal engine you should find a race between a pushrod and modular to be a little different. Wheras the pushrod will probably pull off of the line with its torque, when the modular starts revving it should catch back up when it begines revving higher and higher and builds hp (the only way ricers have anything whatsoever).
I don't agree with that. Ford fixes the flimsy peice of trash that the 87-93 Mustang was built on, and all people can do is piss and moan about the extra 300lbs.87'GTstang said:So glad to see we all agree on one thing at least: the horse/pony needs to go on a diet - that settles that then.
Why not? You seem to think that a 5.0 will not outrun a 99+ on the street. What heavenly law keeps mismatched cars from lining up?5spd GT said:Don't compare the best time (5.0) to the average time (4.6)...
Actually I think you need to take Physics again...a pure torque car is not track king...nor is a pure horsepower car...you have to have a nice even powerband...torque don't mean squat without horsepower...
Yeah, now that's pretty obvious isn't it? It didn't seem so obvious in your first posts.Well sure stock for stock you should be able to beat the 94-98 gt's stock...you have a very slight weight advantage...
About you beating the 99+ Gt's...I believe you beat the drivers...not the car...a stock 5.0 is no match for a stock 99+ GT...
Yeah, the only time I ever took it to the track.14.2 @ 98mph...
...stock 99+ GT 5spd's run 13.9's @100-101
That is impressive if it's true. I haven't seen a bone-stock 4.6 SOHC run a 13.7. Then again, I don't really go looking for bone-stock mustangs at the track anymore....and there was a guy here on stangnet that ran a 13.7 w/ welded in flowmasters through an automatic (it was a 99)...
Great argument. I hope this comment wasn't directed at me though because I don't recall saying anything regarding the difference in displacement.Just because the 5.0 is bigger than the 4.6 doesn't mean it is going to beat it...That "muscle car- bigger is better" attitude doesn't apply here...
Of course they didn't.No the 4.6 SOHC (96-98 gt) did not play catchup on the top end to the 5.0...
Yes this argument will always come up as long as their are mustang forums...got to get used to it...that is why it is a forum...
If bone-stock 99+ GTs are running 13.7s and better, then I digress - the fastest of them will outrun the fastest of the 5.0s (possibly barring the Cobra). However, I don't believe I made any misleading statements, thus far.And it sad that you provide this misleading info in these threads...