0-60 Times ????

Discussion in '1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-' started by apex827, Jan 16, 2009.

  1. What are your guys 0-60 times?
    Did you use one of those G Tech Meters/something similar or by other means?
    Anyone know what the 0-60 of a stock 1993 5.0 with an auto is?
     
  2. I know that stock, the 5.0s were mid 6 second 0-60 with a 5 speed and the optional 3.08 rear gears. The lighter LXs were the faster of the cars.

    Surprisingly, the '86 GT was recognized as the fastest 0-60 Fox car posting 6.0-6.2 second 0-60 times by several magazines like C&D or Hot Rod. Its a fact that I like to rub in people's faces when they start talking crap about my '86 motor. :D

    Between 87 and 93, the Fox cars all stayed about the same, with marginal losses over the years as MAF was added and the cam was changed somewhat. Stock, the SD cars are actually faster than the MAF cars. Again, something stubborn SD guys (like me) love to point out.

    I want to say the auto-trans equipped Foxes were somewhere around .5-1.0 second slower 0-60. So maybe around 7-7.5 seconds?
     
  3. I "tested" my car with the 2.73s when it was a bone stock AOD and got right around 8 seconds.

    Did some calculators online and now it claims low 4s?
     
  4. I havent tested mine. I have one of those G Tech meters, but its actually one of the old ones, not really sure how accurate they are. Just curious as to how fast others 0-60s are and what to expect from mine. I would think it would be around 8, especially with the stock gears in the rear end.
     
  5. Could very well be in the 8 second range. My Jeep GC limited on a Gtech ran 0-60 in 7.6 seconds I believe. It was supposedly a mid 15 second truck?
     
  6. Motor Trend July 1990 reports Mustang 5.0 LX 5 spd did 0-60 in 6.2 and 1/4 mile in [email protected] Here's a link showing the Ford 5.0 stomping a chevy 5.0 into the ground: Shootout At The 5.0 Corral - ThirdGen.org

    I went [email protected] in mine (1989 LX hatch w/ T5) with a K&N filter on BFG Radial T/As back when I was in high school ('98-'99). I had a G-tech, but don't remember using it on that car.

    Automobile April 1987 got a 14.4 1/4 mile out of a Mustang GT 5spd.

    And for those that don't want to admit that '87+ foxes were the epitomy..... don't make me pull out the old Defeo 13-second stocker article... I'm sure I could find it around here somewhere, and post it.

    Chris
     
  7. Was that a poke at me? Haha, man, I know my E6 heads suck for anything but stock sub-5000 RPM engine duty, but -and I quote- from The Official Ford Mustang 5.0 Technical Reference and Performance Handbook: "The fat torque curve prompted by the 1986 H.O. motor's unique cylinder heads allowed this year's Mustang to record some of the Fox car's best ever zero-to-sixty clockings."

    Both Car & Driver and Hot Rod magazine recorded 0-60 times of 6.2 and 6.0 seconds, respectively, in 1986. For the 1987 model, both magazines recorded bests of 6.3 and 6.1 seconds, again respectively. Apparently the HR guys know how to drive, as almost ALL of their testing produced better numbers from what I see here.

    Now as for 1/4 mile times...

    1986-
    C&D: 14.9
    HR: 14.7

    1987-
    C&D: 14.7
    HR: 14.17 (no A/C LX)

    I think the 87's better 1/4 mile times are more an indication of its extra 25 HP.

    Sorry... I get defensive of my 4-eye baby. :D

    While I've got the book in my lap- for the OP:

    The book quotes MM&FF as testing a 3300lb AOD equipped GT with 3.27 rear gears as 15.26 in the 1/4. NO numbers are given for 0-60 times.
     
  8. hehe, yep! Totally was:rlaugh:

    Well who am I to argue with the bible?

    It was hotter and they had the A/C runnin' in '87 :nice: :popcorn:
     
  9. Article of an '88 that did 0-60 in 5.96: 1988 Drag Race Road Test, SS & DI, March 1988

    This thread got me to lookin' because I remember seeing a 5.8 in a mag as a kid, but my memory is a bit fuzzy about what I did last night let alone when I was 10... :)

    Chris
     
  10. Ha! Sometimes I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but I'll go out on a limb here- I do love that book. I can't tell you how many times I've read through it.

    That author should write one for every generation of Mustang, I'd have them sitting on my shelf right along with it. Never in my life have I seen so much information pulled together and dedicated to one car in a book.
     
  11. :stupid: A great reference.
     
  12. I tested mine with a passenger having a stop watch lol... best I could get was 7.5 sec 0-60. But I think it's atleast under 7 if tested accurately... stock except 4.10 gears
     
  13. I remember just under 7.5 passenger stop watch tested in my '86 back in the day. That car had 3.08s and Radial T/As. Really had to abuse the clutch to get a good launch without spin or bogging.

    I remember reading letters to the editor back in those days in both C&D and R&T about HR and some other mags having better times. At the time C&D and R&T both claimed they didn't abuse the cars as much as HR was willing to. I think specifically they didn't power brake burnout to warm up the tires or air down the tires, but I recall something about how they launched as well. Hmmmm. To their credit they both published several letters making fun of them for their driving abilities (with witty comebacks of course). They also had better times than I ever managed, but I never did get to the track on the Eagle Gatorbacks the car came with. I saved up and put one set of the Eagles on that car. I think I saved up for 6 months and the tires were corded in less than that. My poor car had crap tires on it for the next 10 years.
     
  14. I feel like with correct time recording i could make sub 7sec 0-60. I also launched on cold sumitomo htr z and launched to hard with some wheel spin. . One less 180 lb passenger could help too.... I think my ignition needs some work. New plugs and wires but I feel a coil and dist cap and rotor would help
     
  15. Braaaiinnss... Dead zombie threads like braaaainnnsss.
     
    deathb4dismount and a91what like this.