[cartman]

so im driving home from work the other night and come to 5L stang at a red light. the driver is sitting in there laughing for some reason(maybe he was gitty cuz he was about to race, i dunno). so the light turns yellow and he gives it a lil rev, by the time i figured out he wanted to race the light turned green and i got a really crappy launch( i let the clutch out normally then pinned it). he gota crappy launch too, so got a nose on me at around 4000 rpm i figure. but he shifted first and we even up again. we both hit a damp patch on the road when we're shifting into second so we both spun the tires like mad. anywho once we hooked he was ahead a little, but when i hit 3rd gear i started to pull on him.

it was a good race which i expected to totally loose in. maybe his car isnt tuned very well or something? cuz i figured a 5L would demolish me. and all i have is 2.5" exhaust, no cat, straight thru muffler, and cone filter. headers arent installed right now, and neither is the intake pipe at the moment.

 

[Push]

Nice, not all 5.0's are fast. A couple of kids at the track only ran high 15's. Thats probaly because the car is more then 10 years old, and hasn't been maintained well at all.

 

[dogstar]

those older 5.0s are either really fast, or really slow.

and if you get some fool in an automatic convertible, get out and pretend to push just before the race starts....drives em nuts!

lots of stangs will only run a mid 15 because as has been said, they were poorly maintained, and seem to deteriorate in performance pretty quickly when not babied.

 

[supramantt10]

Yeah those stangs are either fixed up or pretty slow . . . lots of people used to call 'em 5.slow :lol:
But it also depends on the driver
anyhow, good race :twisted:

These good ol' MK2s can be alot faster than people think 8)

Great sleeper cars :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

 

[sloopercat]

Hell, I used to beat up on them in my '83 GTI. The early 5.0's were pretty slow.

 

[opron]

stang

just curious... what year was the mustang??

 

[SupraFiend]

pre 85 ones were very slow, stock 0-60 was over 8 seconds

 

[cartman]

according to the body style it was an 87-93 mustang GT, you know like the ones that look kinda boxy. well i guess they all did back then, but yah it looked pretty nice but i guess it didnt have much.

 

[SupraFiend]

they had the same body style from 81 to 93 I belive it was.

 

[lil'devil]

Has anyone ever noticed that most of these threads start off " meet up with this car......had a real crappy launch......took him in the long run......etc,etc,etc".

1st of all LEARN how to LAUNCH the car be4 attempting to drag someone.
Then maybe of just passing him, crawling away from him......you can actually say I HANDED HIM HIS ASS!!!!!. BOOOM HE WAS HISTORY!!!!.... you get my drift.

Later
Mark [/b]

 

[cartman]

if i knew he wanted to race i would have revved up and got a good launch, i didnt know till the last second that he wanted to race.

 

[Sparky]

The 3rd gen stang had a pretty big makeover in 87 (went from boxy to a rounded boxy look :wink: ). 5-slows, stock, aren't all that impressive; IIRC the LX 5.0 convertable for the LATE 80's has about the same 0-60 and 1/4 numbers as the stock Mk II. Of course, they do take very well to mods (something about coming with forged internals, stock)

 

[CST]

my gf has an 84 5.0 with the 5speed, I used to kill her when my supra ran... theyre not as fast as the displacement says they should be. In 84 they had 165hp and they weigh more than the mk2. By 93 (the last year of that generation) when they tuned the engine more I think they had more like 215hp which is still within the mk2s range if you put a 6mge in it.

 

[Crocket]

re:

It was a little after 1985 I think that the 5.0 upgraded to FI from carburetors, hence the increase in power and performance. Late 80s to early 90s 5.0s would be pretty fast, and would more than likely (depending on driver) beat a stock 5M. Although should the 5.0 be mated to an automatic and/or a convertible, the Mustangs times increase big time again, doing low to mid 8s range for 0-60mph.

Sonny

 

[Dean]

Re: re:

Although should the 5.0 be mated to an automatic and/or a convertible, the Mustangs times increase big time again, doing low to mid 8s range for 0-60mph.

Sonny

A couple of years ago I had a run with a Rustang, think it was a '99 or 2000, convertible with the 4.6L motor. I was in my white 83. We were a really close match from stoplight to end of second gear (approx 0-60 MPH). Would have needed a laser at the "finish line" to tell which one of us won. The look on the Mustnag owner's face was priceless.

Could have been a MasterCard commercial, going something like this....

1999 Mustang V8 Convertible, cost, $34,000.
Big Ass Stereo, cost, $2500.
Haircut at "Mullets 'R' Us", cost, $65.
Way-cool sunglasses, cost, $150.
The look on your face after failing to dust a 20 year old Japanese rice-burner in a stoplight race..... Priceless.

:lol:

 

[dogstar]

i was out a couple days ago and some guy wanted to have a go, in the 2003 rental mustang...
well, those v6s are faster than i thought, but he still got his ass kicked pretty bad, then he pulls up and flips me off, so i flip back and yell something about going to hertz next time, cause they have better rentacars.

he wasnt happy to have his secret known

 

[cartman]

yup, the one i raced was one of the boxy but kinda round ones. so i think it was an 87+ mustang, and it was a GT. maybe the guy didnt know how to drive a 5speed very well cuz i think he should have won :? oh well, a win is a win.

 

[Kingsoup]

Digilog ran a older 4.6 (musta been an auto) Mustang at Cayuga last year and very nearly beat him, I think it ran a 16.0 flat and he ran a 16.4

Not that fast at all, but they sound cool.

 

[kato74]

japanese rice burner?

what are you trying to imply here?

 

[SupraFiend]

yeah but its never used in a nice way. But that doesn't matter, Dean used the term for comedic value in a scarstic way. Its like saying "ha ha, my POS car just beat your ferrari". Theres nothing here to start a fight over, nuff said.