Looking for high 11's

1

1Slow90coupe

New Member
Oct 18, 2005
145
0
0
#1
:Word: I am currently deployed, and looking to do some changes when I get home. I have about $1500 to spend. My sig states most of my mods. Just before I left I blew a head gasket, and repaired it. Below is a complete breakdown of my car. Where should the money go first?

Ported stock heads, new springs, valve job
Stock upper/lower
A/C installed
Electric Fan w/alum rad
3.55 gears
Weld draglites 15x7F/15x8R
MT ET Street Radials 235-60-15.......thinking of going bigger
(I originally had them on 10 holes, until I got the Welds)
Front sway bar removed
Battery in Trunk
FMS progressive rate lowering springs 1in (F) 3/4 (R)
Stock upper and lower control arms w/polyurethane bushings


I know a set of aluminum heads would do wonders for my car, but I am considering bigger drag radials, and BBK lower control arms first, and maybe new upper/lower intake, cam, or roller rockers.


I run 12.5 pretty consistent with 1.7-1.8 60ft times.

Thanks for the help.
 

  • Sponsors (?)


#6
What type of gains could I expect from a Eddy upper/lower, and cam. It is a tough call to say where the money should go first.



Post up what you guys think. I will not be able to check again until tommorow. Thanks for the info.
 
#8
1Slow90coupe said:
:Word: I am currently deployed, and looking to do some changes when I get home. I have about $1500 to spend. My sig states most of my mods. Just before I left I blew a head gasket, and repaired it. Below is a complete breakdown of my car. Where should the money go first?

Ported stock heads, new springs, valve job
Stock upper/lower
A/C installed
Electric Fan w/alum rad
3.55 gears
Weld draglites 15x7F/15x8R
MT ET Street Radials 235-60-15.......thinking of going bigger
(I originally had them on 10 holes, until I got the Welds)
Front sway bar removed
Battery in Trunk
FMS progressive rate lowering springs 1in (F) 3/4 (R)
Stock upper and lower control arms w/polyurethane bushings


I know a set of aluminum heads would do wonders for my car, but I am considering bigger drag radials, and BBK lower control arms first, and maybe new upper/lower intake, cam, or roller rockers.


I run 12.5 pretty consistent with 1.7-1.8 60ft times.

Thanks for the help.
Click to expand...
My old combo had ported stock heads, Performer RPM intake, BBK 70mm TB, ProM 75mm MAF, 24s, stock airbox w/ K&N, a/c, stock fan, 3.73, AOD and a Bennett custom nitrous cam.

My suspension mods were Lakewood UCAs/LCAs, SFCs, Lakewood 70/30 front & 50/50 rear struts/shocks, stock springs all the way around.

This was basically a full weight LX hatch. On 26x8 slicks, I'd cut 1.6-1.7 60' and run consistent 11.8x @ 115mph with an NX 150 shot.

For your budget, I'd buy tires, as much suspension work as you can and an intake.

SFCs are subframe connestors.
 
#9
id would do either a crane cam and in your sig it says MAC exhaust? is this a full exhaust or just from header back. if its from header back id get a set of BBk shorty headers or something. then see what you left with.
 
#10
118mph you should hit 11's, Id say get a nice set of beefy et drags. And a good upper and lower intake, that will really be amazing if your still running the stock lower intake, I cant believe your getting that mph on stock heads. Thats awesome, but if it were me, id find a set of used afr's, used upper and lower intkae, and nice big slicks.

Then again you do have ALOT of mph, ive seen guys run 11.5 at 115, maybe you should focus on some suspension and get that 60' down more. You need more torque off the line and that mph will be very useful
 
#12
ryan218 said:
id would do either a crane cam and in your sig it says MAC exhaust? is this a full exhaust or just from header back. if its from header back id get a set of BBk shorty headers or something. then see what you left with.
Click to expand...


My exaust includes MAC shorty headers also. They are okay fo now. Eventually BBK will be in order.
 
#14
I belive that inceasing traction, and reducing weight will get you where you want to be.

One good thing is that many weight reductions are FREE. However, many require sacrificing because you are deleting from the car. Do a search on weight reduction, there are so many things that weigh your car down. Weight kills ET and MPH, and it also puts more stress on the car having to haul all that weight. Not only is weight reduction important, but location of the weight reduction is also important, front weight, especially on our nose heavy cars, is very important. This brings me to traction.

Mustangs are nose heavy cars. You want to get the weight shifted to the rear, quickly, efficienly, and to have a a suspension that can manipulate that weight and the power to getting the weight back there, and then holding the rear steady. This is probally the most difficult part of making a car fast. How many times have you seen people buid beasts of engine's but cannot get them to hook? It's easy to make a powerfull engine, but a working suspesion is beyond most people's abilities. 1.7-1.8 is a good 60ft, but not good enough if you really want to run some ET's. Every .1 off your 60ft is a good .2 off your ET. If you could get a 1.4 60ft, you would be at your goal I am sure. Even a 1.5-1.6 would be a vast improvment. One great thing about a car that dead hooks is that you can use the engine at full power all the way down the track, not just after the ???ft mark.

I say some good UCA's and LCA's along with some real slicks, maby some more gear (4.10-4.30) maby an anti-roll bar in the rear, so you can launch at full throttle on bottle, with a higher rpm at launch, you could nail what your looking for.
 
#15
90mustangGT said:
I belive that inceasing traction, and reducing weight will get you where you want to be.

One good thing is that many weight reductions are FREE. However, many require sacrificing because you are deleting from the car. Do a search on weight reduction, there are so many things that weigh your car down. Weight kills ET and MPH, and it also puts more stress on the car having to haul all that weight. Not only is weight reduction important, but location of the weight reduction is also important, front weight, especially on our nose heavy cars, is very important. This brings me to traction.

Mustangs are nose heavy cars. You want to get the weight shifted to the rear, quickly, efficienly, and to have a a suspension that can manipulate that weight and the power to getting the weight back there, and then holding the rear steady. This is probally the most difficult part of making a car fast. How many times have you seen people buid beasts of engine's but cannot get them to hook? It's easy to make a powerfull engine, but a working suspesion is beyond most people's abilities. 1.7-1.8 is a good 60ft, but not good enough if you really want to run some ET's. Every .1 off your 60ft is a good .2 off your ET. If you could get a 1.4 60ft, you would be at your goal I am sure. Even a 1.5-1.6 would be a vast improvment. One great thing about a car that dead hooks is that you can use the engine at full power all the way down the track, not just after the ???ft mark.

I say some good UCA's and LCA's along with some real slicks, maby some more gear (4.10-4.30) maby an anti-roll bar in the rear, so you can launch at full throttle on bottle, with a higher rpm at launch, you could nail what your looking for.
Click to expand...



Upper and lower control arms are definitely on the list. I was considering traction bars from Lakewood, or BBK upper/lower. Currently I cannot launch my car at more than 2250 off the line, or I will smoke first gear. That is with the drag radials I have set at 13-14psi with a good burn out. I have also considered a tubular K-Member for the weight reduction. I will research more weight reduction.
 
#17
so... this is what your looking for...

pic.php


pic.php
[/URL][/IMG]

lol, im sorry, i've been at home sick since monday, so i have a little too much time on my hands.:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MadSquirrelTech
Fox Build ideas for the 'Hudson Heap' (87 GT)
Replies
20
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
MadSquirrelTech
MadSquirrelTech
T
BMR Relocation Brackets
Replies
3
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
TremecFox90
T
1992 5.Slow GT
Improving 60ft times on my 92GT, please help!
Replies
34
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
FastDriver
FastDriver
B
Help price this Fox
Replies
0
Views
528
What is it Worth?!?!?
Blueinfan
B
Mhalc1
New Foxbody Member from California
Replies
8
Views
1K
The Welcome Wagon
caliber92
caliber92
Top Bottom
Back
New
Hot
Menu