BIG RED

ok so the other night i was driving aorund with my friend about 2 in the morning. He has a del sol with the B16A (DOHC V=tec came sock) in it and for a honda i have to say its pretty nice, he's been senseible in his mods (suspension rims &tires, they are mostly handeling mods) so its not real ricey other than the exhaust. any how we are just driving along and this maroon mustang comes up out of nowhere and get right on chris's butt so we hop in the right lane to let the guy go by. He pulls up beside us and stays there just jumping his car and he continues to tap the gas. chris wasnt really wanting to race cuz he said he wanted to keep his perfect record of 7-0. I finally talked him into going so he drops it into 2nd at about 40ish and the mustang guns it. Chris slowly starts to pull on him and continues to do so the whole time... by the time we shut down at almost 100MPH he had nearly put 1 and a half car lenghts on him..........i was in disbelief .........so the guy pulls up next to us again and i ask him if its a 5.0 and he nods yes then i asked him if it was a auto, he nods yes again. Apparently the guy wanted to redeem himself so he said he wanted to go from a 55 roll. We do as he wanted this time it was closer because i think he was really ready but still chris put him right at his rear bumper. I never thought he would beat the guy........and chris was happy to take his record to 8-0..........i felt bad for the mustang guy, thats deffinetly not something i would want to have to admit losing to..........anyhow do the autos in those things really kill them that much to where it is possible to lose to a nearly all stock honda???

X_03_Cobra_guy

Yeah the automatics run in the 15's. They were slow.

TransAm52804

Automatic pre-'99's. It seemed like they started to get somewhat decent in '99, but any year before that with Ford's slushbox was horrendously slow compared to its manual twin.

I'd be ridiculously embarassed if I was the 5.0 guy losing twice to a stock Del-Sol.

BiGGinZ

93-98 gt's . Ford did the mustang bad with those cars. Stock autos were horrible. Glad to see that ford has stepped up since then.

boostedte37

You,ve got to know your limitations, and your cars.
Don,t try to pick on a honda if your driving a turd

mackey

I don't agree being a Mustang Owner. The 94/95 have the 5.0L still and were just a hair heavier than the fox body. The 96-98 had the 4.6 mod motors which weren't as "strong" or strong at all. (exc cobra)

TransAm52804

^ The '96-'98 GTs were, in my and many others' including magazines, about the worst performing Mustang V8's in the past 30 years. I actually like the '94-'95 GT and Cobras. Dunno what it is about them, but I wouldn't mind having one as a second muscle car. The '94-'95's were also a few ticks quicker than the '96-'98 Stang GT's since their peak torque and also (I think) h.p. came in 1000 rpm's earlier than the early 4.6L Stangs' did. Of course I'm sure you already knew all this.

Vendetta

I think you mean 94-98... 93 GTs were a great body for drag racing (low weight), but the notchbacks were better.

BiGGinZ

93 was still the fox-body huh, if so I did mean 94-98.

BiGGinZ

So...your point on them being good is??? Don't get me wrong, I actually like the body style of them but they were what 215hp then 225hp and ran in the 15's. Those number are close to the 3.8 v6 in the f-bodies.

bradyb

That proves that Honda's have more Vtec then Mustangs!

KB99WS6

iTrader: (6)

Alot of people put down the 94-98 stang's. I agree they werent too stout from the factory, but remember something though, most people who buy mustangs don't keep them stock and there is a HUGE inexpensive aftermarket for these cars. Also, I personally feel they are one of the nicest, cleanest looking generation of mustangs ever. Here's some eye candy for those who agree.

By the way, the red one with the kid kneeling in front of it is pushing over 500rwhp, and those are 18" Fikse FM5's. It also has full Kenny Brown Level 5 racing suspension, done up interior w/Recaro seats, big $$ stereo. You name it, it has it. Its one sweet *** car!

boostedte37

Yall selling parts or what? Kiddin, some nice rides

BiGGinZ

If you would read you would see that I said I like how they loook. Oh and I said that the gts were horrible, nothing about cobras which are what basically what you show. Also I know it can be made fast, a civic can get 500whp. I said they were horrible for the image ford was trying to put with them. Look at a 95 gt vs a 95 z28. Come on, no competition. If you want to get real nasty look at the 98 gt vs the 98 z28. Most people will admit like I stated that the 94-98 auto gt's just are not up to par stock. And I said I am glad they stepped it up today.

KB99WS6

iTrader: (6)

yeah I know you said you like the way they look in a later post. I was just pointing out how I really like those years. And yes I know anything can be made fast. But a civic doesn't have a 5.0 or 4.6 V8 to start with or the aftermarket potential. And a civic, a car with a heritage it economy & mpg, is not a mustang. I do realize bone stock the GT's were not that fast. But remember at the time not that many cars were all that fast. The 98 LS1 fbod's and even before that were way ahead of their time in terms of power. We all know that. I mean come on, they were neck and neck with the vettes. it didn't even really make sense. Not that I am complaining now Also, I don't think the GT was meant to go up against the Z28's and TA's, so much as the cobra's were. Ford just always offered more trim levels than GM. The GT was just the middle ground option between the V6 and the Cobra. Anyhow, my hole point was I don't think the puke face was appropriate.