How Much Hp To Run 12s In Sn95 And In Fox?

mmm... I see. Well, when you can swap gears and add traction, you don't need a whole hell of a lot of power to run a low ET. However, just after the finish line, that new GT is going to blow your doors off because it's trapping a lot higher.

If you want the equivalent power to keep with it even from a highway roll, or to match traps in the 1/4, I'd say a solid 300-320 rwhp.


I think that's underestimating the '85 significantly and overestimating the New GT a little. I'd guess the 85 mustang weights quoted were 4 cylinder LXs. You're probably close to the same as the '87-93s. It's the same chassis, motor, and a close enough body.
Thanks man good reply, answered my question. I guess I should have worded it differently from the jump
 
  • Sponsors (?)


Yea, I agree about the whole traction and gears thing. I can easily keep up with a newer mustang as long as its a high rpm launch. Once you get up into the higher mph though they fly by!
Yea, that's one reason they come stock with more power now in days right? Because the added weight for all the new good suspension they come with. I know you hear comes with 400hp stock but knock off some of that factory over-rating and think about weight differences. I'm not knocking the new ones they definitely are beast and nice racecars from the factory.
The new ones are pretty quick huh? I haven't ridden in one and haven't been to a track in a long while to see one in action. The other day I was reading an article on mustang gt vs charger rt. Thats what kinda sparked this thread. They said the mustang ran like a high 12 (12.8 maybe it was??) and the charger ran a 14! Like 14.05 I think. Must be one heavy pig. They also said the stang had a top speed of 150 where the dodge was 170
 
I know huh, exactly what I was thinking. They're sexy but that's a lotta scratch to run 14's. My old man would call it "a hwy cruiser." Maybe the target demographic isn't wanting a car to beat on at the track. Don't think I would on a mid 30k dolla car either.
True I got a buddy that has one of those v12 jags. All he does is drive the interstate racing Audi's and what not, high speed stuff. Crazy.
 
If he wants some interstate action, he needs to come live in Germany. I've spent half a tank of fuel staying with a couple of porche turbos in my Corvette. Those cars are faster, but no one really wants to try to stay above 160 for very long, and I'm just as comfortable there as they are :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I've seen a lot of newer mustangs,camaros,challengers,etc at the track and none of the stock cars ran 12's. Not here at least. Even raced a GTO with one of those rear turbo setups that was having problems getting into the mid 12,s(no slicks). They have capability to with some sticky tires though. For a fox body to run 12's on radial tires I think it will take 275-300whp
 
Yes this is possible... But how many people have done it? Also this is on slicks. And weight reduction.
1992 LX with GT interior from the factory.
No weight removal, 100% stock suspension, underdrives, full exhaust MAF., DOT's on turbines and skinnies on convo pros.
232hp, 3250 race weight, 12.96 @ 104.0 in 2600'DA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I drove to and from the track on those tires every weekend and many Wednesday nights for over a year... 45 miles each way, often times leaving them on the car for daily driving and fun outings.
Original post requested street tires, and that is what DOT's are.
 
FWIW, I consider the newer Mickey Thompson ET Street Radial to be a street tire, since it's DOT approved. I have every bit of confidence that a
1992 LX with GT interior from the factory.
No weight removal, 100% stock suspension, underdrives, full exhaust MAF., DOT's on turbines and skinnies on convo pros.
232hp, 3250 race weight, 12.96 @ 104.0 in 2600'DA.
booyah! I'm glad to see someone confirm the 240rwhp guess! Well done, sir:nice:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ha! I actually wrote the first portion of that post, but stopped and left the site earlier. I guess the site has a memory, because I didn't realize it was there when I quoted cleanLX's post. The end of the original portion was going to be "that a car could cut into the 12s without the necessity of slicks."