guy in 90 stang wanst to race for $$...need opinions
07-23-2005, 07:14 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guy in 90 stang wanst to race for $$...need opinions i was outside washing my car today and 2 of the neighborhood kids come up to me saying their import civic ex can beat me, they always talk **** when they see me, so i take them for a ride around the block. They quickly lose the idea that their civic has a chance in hell. But then they go on saying they have this friend with this mustang that runs 10's, im like of god do these kids ever stop! they say he will race you for $500 bucks. i say ok we'll go to the track and race. I didnt think they actually had a friend with a fast stang, cause they all drive imports. Then today this older guy (maybe 35 or so) comes up to my door with the 2 kids, he says so i hear you wanna race. I was taken off guard but said "sure, are you the guy with the stang". He confirmed he was. He apparently has a 90 mustang 5.0 5 speed with bolt ons (wouldnt get specific as to what bolt ons) but made clear to me its all stock internals + a 100 shot of NOS skinnys up front and slicks in the back. He wanted me to turn my car on ( bone stock 98 trans am a4) so i can give him a few revs. He wouldnt say what he runs but the kids claim 10's which is almost impossible for a 90 5.0 without major engine work, even with the 100 shot i think. My question is what would a 5.0 with all the bolt ons imaginable and a 100 shot possibly run, i mean fastest possible? low 12's would be my thought? He wants to race next week at moroso, what do u guys think i should get in terms of mods to beat this guy. I know its hard to say without knowing exactly what he has but just some possible ideas. Thanks in advance
07-23-2005, 08:54 PM
#5
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... im sure i would lose being stock.....but i need some advice on some mods to get before the race to at least make it close. I dont think i will race him for the 500 bucks. But still i dont wanna look like a dumbass, i want it to be at least close.
07-23-2005, 09:18 PM
#7
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grandview Missouri
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Full bolt-ons with a 100 shot in a stripper (entirely possible being he is also on skinneys and slicks) wouldnt put him in the 10s. It would however be more than enough to wax a stock f-body.
Trending Topics
07-23-2005, 09:20 PM
#8
STF Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was a mustang junkie for 10 years, and read all the magazines and web pages I could find. The bottom line is the 5.0 needs new heads to do anything of note. If he has stock heads and stock cam, there is no way that engine is even putting out 300hp without the juice. The heads just won't support it.
The 5.0 was rated anywhere from 185 to 225 depending on the year and the rating method. realistically they were putting out about 215 crank or so, since the dyno ratings on stock 5.0s was around 185rwhp I believe. underdrive pullies are worth about 10 real hp, cold air intake is worth MAYBE 5hp. cobra/gt-40/edlebrock intake is worth about 10-20hp depending on other mods, probably lower without accompanying heads/cam package. catback is worth maybe 5hp. headers and off-road hpipe are good for maybe 20 total. You've now got about 225-250 rwhp out of this thing if you're lucky.
What you should be worried about is how much the thing weighs. It is entirely possible to get an 87-93 foxbody down into the 2700lb - 2800lb range by stripping out everything you can. That puts them in the high 13s on the stock engine, and i'd say low 13s on a full bolt-on engine. That's just bench racing guesses. I do remember stories that when the 87s first came out, stripper stick LXs with slicks, gears, and fantastic drivers WERE able to break into the top of the 12s, with no engine mods. However those are like the 02 camaros that ran 12.9s from the factory... they exist, but it's hardly normal.
Assuming that his view of "stock internals" does not include heads/cams, then basically I'd expect you're looking at a car that, realistically, can be as quick as low 12s or high 11s on a 100 shot. There is no chance in hell that thing is running 10s. It's just not happening. Not even with Jebus behind the wheel.
If it DOES have a head/cam package, you could be looking at anything from a 250bhp to 400bhp engine. Unless of course he's really lieing and he's got a 347 stroker or even a 351w (it takes a hell of a trained eye to spot the difference between a 302 and a 351w), then I think you're going to get your *** handed to you.
Let me put it this way. My old 5.0 (a 94, heavier than a 90) was almost as quick as my TA from 0-60 or so. Beyond 60mph, the TA left the mustang behind like it wasn't even trying.
The 5.0 was rated anywhere from 185 to 225 depending on the year and the rating method. realistically they were putting out about 215 crank or so, since the dyno ratings on stock 5.0s was around 185rwhp I believe. underdrive pullies are worth about 10 real hp, cold air intake is worth MAYBE 5hp. cobra/gt-40/edlebrock intake is worth about 10-20hp depending on other mods, probably lower without accompanying heads/cam package. catback is worth maybe 5hp. headers and off-road hpipe are good for maybe 20 total. You've now got about 225-250 rwhp out of this thing if you're lucky.
What you should be worried about is how much the thing weighs. It is entirely possible to get an 87-93 foxbody down into the 2700lb - 2800lb range by stripping out everything you can. That puts them in the high 13s on the stock engine, and i'd say low 13s on a full bolt-on engine. That's just bench racing guesses. I do remember stories that when the 87s first came out, stripper stick LXs with slicks, gears, and fantastic drivers WERE able to break into the top of the 12s, with no engine mods. However those are like the 02 camaros that ran 12.9s from the factory... they exist, but it's hardly normal.
Assuming that his view of "stock internals" does not include heads/cams, then basically I'd expect you're looking at a car that, realistically, can be as quick as low 12s or high 11s on a 100 shot. There is no chance in hell that thing is running 10s. It's just not happening. Not even with Jebus behind the wheel.
If it DOES have a head/cam package, you could be looking at anything from a 250bhp to 400bhp engine. Unless of course he's really lieing and he's got a 347 stroker or even a 351w (it takes a hell of a trained eye to spot the difference between a 302 and a 351w), then I think you're going to get your *** handed to you.
Let me put it this way. My old 5.0 (a 94, heavier than a 90) was almost as quick as my TA from 0-60 or so. Beyond 60mph, the TA left the mustang behind like it wasn't even trying.
07-23-2005, 09:27 PM
#9
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grandview Missouri
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Skarecrow
I was a mustang junkie for 10 years, and read all the magazines and web pages I could find. The bottom line is the 5.0 needs new heads to do anything of note. If he has stock heads and stock cam, there is no way that engine is even putting out 300hp without the juice. The heads just won't support it.
The 5.0 was rated anywhere from 185 to 225 depending on the year and the rating method. realistically they were putting out about 215 crank or so, since the dyno ratings on stock 5.0s was around 185rwhp I believe. underdrive pullies are worth about 10 real hp, cold air intake is worth MAYBE 5hp. cobra/gt-40/edlebrock intake is worth about 10-20hp depending on other mods, probably lower without accompanying heads/cam package. catback is worth maybe 5hp. headers and off-road hpipe are good for maybe 20 total. You've now got about 225-250 rwhp out of this thing if you're lucky.
What you should be worried about is how much the thing weighs. It is entirely possible to get an 87-93 foxbody down into the 2700lb - 2800lb range by stripping out everything you can. That puts them in the high 13s on the stock engine, and i'd say low 13s on a full bolt-on engine. That's just bench racing guesses. I do remember stories that when the 87s first came out, stripper stick LXs with slicks, gears, and fantastic drivers WERE able to break into the top of the 12s, with no engine mods. However those are like the 02 camaros that ran 12.9s from the factory... they exist, but it's hardly normal.
Assuming that his view of "stock internals" does not include heads/cams, then basically I'd expect you're looking at a car that, realistically, can be as quick as low 12s or high 11s on a 100 shot. There is no chance in hell that thing is running 10s. It's just not happening. Not even with Jebus behind the wheel.
If it DOES have a head/cam package, you could be looking at anything from a 250bhp to 400bhp engine. Unless of course he's really lieing and he's got a 347 stroker or even a 351w (it takes a hell of a trained eye to spot the difference between a 302 and a 351w), then I think you're going to get your *** handed to you.
Let me put it this way. My old 5.0 (a 94, heavier than a 90) was almost as quick as my TA from 0-60 or so. Beyond 60mph, the TA left the mustang behind like it wasn't even trying.
The 5.0 was rated anywhere from 185 to 225 depending on the year and the rating method. realistically they were putting out about 215 crank or so, since the dyno ratings on stock 5.0s was around 185rwhp I believe. underdrive pullies are worth about 10 real hp, cold air intake is worth MAYBE 5hp. cobra/gt-40/edlebrock intake is worth about 10-20hp depending on other mods, probably lower without accompanying heads/cam package. catback is worth maybe 5hp. headers and off-road hpipe are good for maybe 20 total. You've now got about 225-250 rwhp out of this thing if you're lucky.
What you should be worried about is how much the thing weighs. It is entirely possible to get an 87-93 foxbody down into the 2700lb - 2800lb range by stripping out everything you can. That puts them in the high 13s on the stock engine, and i'd say low 13s on a full bolt-on engine. That's just bench racing guesses. I do remember stories that when the 87s first came out, stripper stick LXs with slicks, gears, and fantastic drivers WERE able to break into the top of the 12s, with no engine mods. However those are like the 02 camaros that ran 12.9s from the factory... they exist, but it's hardly normal.
Assuming that his view of "stock internals" does not include heads/cams, then basically I'd expect you're looking at a car that, realistically, can be as quick as low 12s or high 11s on a 100 shot. There is no chance in hell that thing is running 10s. It's just not happening. Not even with Jebus behind the wheel.
If it DOES have a head/cam package, you could be looking at anything from a 250bhp to 400bhp engine. Unless of course he's really lieing and he's got a 347 stroker or even a 351w (it takes a hell of a trained eye to spot the difference between a 302 and a 351w), then I think you're going to get your *** handed to you.
Let me put it this way. My old 5.0 (a 94, heavier than a 90) was almost as quick as my TA from 0-60 or so. Beyond 60mph, the TA left the mustang behind like it wasn't even trying.
07-23-2005, 09:58 PM
#11
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grandview Missouri
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HOSS
spend 500 on a tnt f1, spray a 150, and hand him his ***...free n2o kit
Tag that guy with a 150 shot of your own and it'll be in your favor. Atleast assuming he isnt lieing about his mods.
07-23-2005, 10:31 PM
#12
Launching!
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ocala, Florida
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah, my buddy had a 5.0 with every mod possible (minus the motor work) and a 150 shot and ran low 12's. He had 4.10's, slicks and skinnies and was a beast of the line but had no top end. If you add a 150 shot you would take him, unless he has motor work then forget it, untill you do something!
07-23-2005, 10:35 PM
#13
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Skarecrow
I was a mustang junkie for 10 years, and read all the magazines and web pages I could find. The bottom line is the 5.0 needs new heads to do anything of note. If he has stock heads and stock cam, there is no way that engine is even putting out 300hp without the juice. The heads just won't support it.
The 5.0 was rated anywhere from 185 to 225 depending on the year and the rating method. realistically they were putting out about 215 crank or so, since the dyno ratings on stock 5.0s was around 185rwhp I believe. underdrive pullies are worth about 10 real hp, cold air intake is worth MAYBE 5hp. cobra/gt-40/edlebrock intake is worth about 10-20hp depending on other mods, probably lower without accompanying heads/cam package. catback is worth maybe 5hp. headers and off-road hpipe are good for maybe 20 total. You've now got about 225-250 rwhp out of this thing if you're lucky.
What you should be worried about is how much the thing weighs. It is entirely possible to get an 87-93 foxbody down into the 2700lb - 2800lb range by stripping out everything you can. That puts them in the high 13s on the stock engine, and i'd say low 13s on a full bolt-on engine. That's just bench racing guesses. I do remember stories that when the 87s first came out, stripper stick LXs with slicks, gears, and fantastic drivers WERE able to break into the top of the 12s, with no engine mods. However those are like the 02 camaros that ran 12.9s from the factory... they exist, but it's hardly normal.
Assuming that his view of "stock internals" does not include heads/cams, then basically I'd expect you're looking at a car that, realistically, can be as quick as low 12s or high 11s on a 100 shot. There is no chance in hell that thing is running 10s. It's just not happening. Not even with Jebus behind the wheel.
If it DOES have a head/cam package, you could be looking at anything from a 250bhp to 400bhp engine. Unless of course he's really lieing and he's got a 347 stroker or even a 351w (it takes a hell of a trained eye to spot the difference between a 302 and a 351w), then I think you're going to get your *** handed to you.
Let me put it this way. My old 5.0 (a 94, heavier than a 90) was almost as quick as my TA from 0-60 or so. Beyond 60mph, the TA left the mustang behind like it wasn't even trying.
The 5.0 was rated anywhere from 185 to 225 depending on the year and the rating method. realistically they were putting out about 215 crank or so, since the dyno ratings on stock 5.0s was around 185rwhp I believe. underdrive pullies are worth about 10 real hp, cold air intake is worth MAYBE 5hp. cobra/gt-40/edlebrock intake is worth about 10-20hp depending on other mods, probably lower without accompanying heads/cam package. catback is worth maybe 5hp. headers and off-road hpipe are good for maybe 20 total. You've now got about 225-250 rwhp out of this thing if you're lucky.
What you should be worried about is how much the thing weighs. It is entirely possible to get an 87-93 foxbody down into the 2700lb - 2800lb range by stripping out everything you can. That puts them in the high 13s on the stock engine, and i'd say low 13s on a full bolt-on engine. That's just bench racing guesses. I do remember stories that when the 87s first came out, stripper stick LXs with slicks, gears, and fantastic drivers WERE able to break into the top of the 12s, with no engine mods. However those are like the 02 camaros that ran 12.9s from the factory... they exist, but it's hardly normal.
Assuming that his view of "stock internals" does not include heads/cams, then basically I'd expect you're looking at a car that, realistically, can be as quick as low 12s or high 11s on a 100 shot. There is no chance in hell that thing is running 10s. It's just not happening. Not even with Jebus behind the wheel.
If it DOES have a head/cam package, you could be looking at anything from a 250bhp to 400bhp engine. Unless of course he's really lieing and he's got a 347 stroker or even a 351w (it takes a hell of a trained eye to spot the difference between a 302 and a 351w), then I think you're going to get your *** handed to you.
Let me put it this way. My old 5.0 (a 94, heavier than a 90) was almost as quick as my TA from 0-60 or so. Beyond 60mph, the TA left the mustang behind like it wasn't even trying.
07-23-2005, 10:45 PM
#14
I call BS on the heads/cam not supporting it. There was a write-up in one of the last 5.0 magazines about a guy who bought an LX 5.0 AOD of all things, stalled it, put slicks on it, supercharged it, and ran methanol injection on stock engine internals (no head/cam swaps...) and stock AOD internals (had a stall but not even a Trans-Go shift kit. Mod list is:
V-1-S- trim vortec
Shorty headers, BBK H-pipe, Flowmaster 2-chambers
Walbro 342lph pump 42# injectors Kirban regulator
Stock AOD with PI 4,000rpm stall
Stock 8.8 rear/diff with 3.73 gears
Stock A9P computer
MSD 6AL ign.
4-cylinder mustang springs up front with GT springs out back w/1 coil removed
Lakewood 90/10's
Kumho 165/80/15 up front
Weld rims
Upper/lower boxed/adj. control arms set at 4* pinion angle
Airbag in RR spring coil
Steeda subframes
He was pushing 17 lbs boost on a 65:35 methanol mix/water mix at 140PSI methanol pump pressure.
He turned 10.91 at 123mph
The car weighed 3230 with him in it.
IF you want to look the article up it is in the 2004 December Mustang 5.0 magazine and the guy's name is Tim Stockwell (he also made a painfully stock 87 Turbo-T turn in the mid 10's ....) The total project cost after the sale of the A/C and pony rims, etc. was 8,000 including the car...
Sorry for the long post, just letting you know how easy 10's with a stock head/cam/intake 5.0 can be IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
V-1-S- trim vortec
Shorty headers, BBK H-pipe, Flowmaster 2-chambers
Walbro 342lph pump 42# injectors Kirban regulator
Stock AOD with PI 4,000rpm stall
Stock 8.8 rear/diff with 3.73 gears
Stock A9P computer
MSD 6AL ign.
4-cylinder mustang springs up front with GT springs out back w/1 coil removed
Lakewood 90/10's
Kumho 165/80/15 up front
Weld rims
Upper/lower boxed/adj. control arms set at 4* pinion angle
Airbag in RR spring coil
Steeda subframes
He was pushing 17 lbs boost on a 65:35 methanol mix/water mix at 140PSI methanol pump pressure.
He turned 10.91 at 123mph
The car weighed 3230 with him in it.
IF you want to look the article up it is in the 2004 December Mustang 5.0 magazine and the guy's name is Tim Stockwell (he also made a painfully stock 87 Turbo-T turn in the mid 10's ....) The total project cost after the sale of the A/C and pony rims, etc. was 8,000 including the car...
Sorry for the long post, just letting you know how easy 10's with a stock head/cam/intake 5.0 can be IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
07-24-2005, 01:15 AM
#15
Banned
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 'Merica
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It looks like the guy doesnt know what he's doing though, your best bet would be..."My car isnt running good" I have bad sparkplugs, hell is your pride really worth 500$? Get some drag radials and a 150 shot if you wanna go through with it though 
07-24-2005, 01:41 AM
#16
The major advantage that 5.0's have is that they hook like crazy. A bone stock 90 5.0 puts about 200 to the pavement with a 5-speed and can hit high 14's with the crap 2.73 gears. Heads/cam/intake bumps that to about 300 or so depending on the combo (MY NA HCI combo puts out 270-285 rwhp according to the engine builder, Central Coast Mustang, and i went with GT-40P heads (cheap, but effective) milled to 10.5:1 comp.) So considering he would have 275 or so rwhp with HCI, plus 100 shot that is almost 400rwhp. Couple that with what is most likely 400+ rwtq and you just bit off a wee bit more than a stock F-bod can chew. I say race him for fun or not at all (unless you can afford $500).
Assuming he is BONE STOCK, a 100 shot ALONE would propel him into the LOW LOW 13's/high 12's with traction (and he has big/littles and slicks, plus the equivalent of a 4-link pretty much.)
Assuming he is BONE STOCK, a 100 shot ALONE would propel him into the LOW LOW 13's/high 12's with traction (and he has big/littles and slicks, plus the equivalent of a 4-link pretty much.)
07-25-2005, 07:06 PM
#17
STF Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Stanger88
I call BS on the heads/cam not supporting it.
--edited--
He was pushing 17 lbs boost on a 65:35 methanol mix/water mix at 140PSI methanol pump pressure.
He turned 10.91 at 123mph
The car weighed 3230 with him in it.
--edited--
He was pushing 17 lbs boost on a 65:35 methanol mix/water mix at 140PSI methanol pump pressure.
He turned 10.91 at 123mph
The car weighed 3230 with him in it.
I was, I thought obviously, talking about N/A cars. If you want to push more than a full atmosphere of pressure into an engine that isn't even running on gasoline, then all bets are off.
How about this, I'll make the wager that a simple cam and head swap would probably help that guy pick up easily a hundred hp with that setup, probably significantly more. You own a 5.0, you should know that the heads are garbage, don't try and pretend otherwise.
07-25-2005, 07:49 PM
#18
10 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: hatboro, pa
Posts: 1,284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 can play that game. find a slicked/skinnied, full bolt on, 100 shotted, stripped, ls1 for him to run. 
. he'd be fucked. **** him also if he want's to run for $, your car is STOCK, so tell him he is a jackass for even asking.
i would've laughed in the guy's face and shut the door- even told him to get a life.
. he'd be fucked. **** him also if he want's to run for $, your car is STOCK, so tell him he is a jackass for even asking. i would've laughed in the guy's face and shut the door- even told him to get a life.
07-25-2005, 11:53 PM
#20
My only point was that the stock E7 heads (while they are about 50hp or so down compared to AFR165's) are CAPABLE of 10's...and the stock cam is a rather efficient profile, even when used NA. A proper HCI fox with boltons is a low 12's car if it can hook. My friend runs 12.20's with about 320rwhp in his 86'. Launches at 4500 on MT's. I saw with my own eyes a gutted Coupe pulling 12.6's with just slicks, struts/shocks and a cam (no heads, no clue why not though). In all honesty, I would say look that fox over VERY well before you even THINK about putting $ down and i still say jsut do it for fun.