mustang 5.0
10-25-2005, 11:14 AM
#1
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Houston,TX
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mustang 5.0 sorry no kill yet, this guy in my apt. complex drives a 5.0 mustang, that has like the 95 or 96 body style, the style with the 3 horizontal line brake lights right before they switched to the 3 vertical line brake lights. anyway, how much power are these things rated at? 305? i've been looking on the net but no luck.
10-25-2005, 11:16 AM
#2
Originally Posted by imnotplutonium
sorry no kill yet, this guy in my apt. complex drives a 5.0 mustang, that has like the 95 or 96 body style, the style with the 3 horizontal line brake lights right before they switched to the 3 vertical line brake lights. anyway, how much power are these things rated at? 305? i've been looking on the net but no luck.
10-25-2005, 12:06 PM
#4
TECH Addict
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Garden City, KS
Posts: 2,529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
305??? UM NO!!! they were 240, when the older 5.0's (87-93) were actually faster with 225HP. The 94-95's I think were the bastard childen after the Fox and before the 4.6. They were heavier than the Foxes and had less power, not much but less. Even if it came down to modding it, you would be better off finding a cheaper Fox and modding it. From what I have seen, unless it is HEAVILY modded you should walk all over it.
10-25-2005, 02:25 PM
#6
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Houston,TX
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok yea 305 was way high, i was just estimating, giving ford a little credit... i guess too much. ok well i've been wanting to see if this guy wants to go but wasnt sure if i even had a chance, i've been told the 5.0's were badass, im guess just the foxbody
10-25-2005, 02:43 PM
#7
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Port Richey,FL
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5.0 are bad *** my borther has one with full exaust and 3:90 gears and he beats my friend in his 95 formula and he as exaust to i like mustangs but i like my T/A better.
Trending Topics
10-25-2005, 05:15 PM
#12
Launching!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Newark ohio
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HP ratings for the mustang 87-2004
87 - 92 - 225hp
93 - 205hp (although still just as fast as the 87-92's the way the rated hp was different and to make the 94 look better since it was actually a drop in power)
94 - 97 - 215hp
98 - 225hp
99 - 2004 - 260hp
Overlord - the fox's can take some boost 87-92 forged internals 93's had hyper pistons still ok but they can't take to much detonation. Although the block can only handle about 450hp then after that it's a timebomb to when it's going to split, or throw all the interals all over the road.
87 - 92 - 225hp
93 - 205hp (although still just as fast as the 87-92's the way the rated hp was different and to make the 94 look better since it was actually a drop in power)
94 - 97 - 215hp
98 - 225hp
99 - 2004 - 260hp
Overlord - the fox's can take some boost 87-92 forged internals 93's had hyper pistons still ok but they can't take to much detonation. Although the block can only handle about 450hp then after that it's a timebomb to when it's going to split, or throw all the interals all over the road.
10-25-2005, 05:24 PM
#14
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hattiesburg, Mississippi
Posts: 654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 89tang
HP ratings for the mustang 87-2004
87 - 92 - 225hp
93 - 205hp (although still just as fast as the 87-92's the way the rated hp was different and to make the 94 look better since it was actually a drop in power)
94 - 97 - 215hp
98 - 225hp
99 - 2004 - 260hp
Overlord - the fox's can take some boost 87-92 forged internals 93's had hyper pistons still ok but they can't take to much detonation. Although the block can only handle about 450hp then after that it's a timebomb to when it's going to split, or throw all the interals all over the road.
87 - 92 - 225hp
93 - 205hp (although still just as fast as the 87-92's the way the rated hp was different and to make the 94 look better since it was actually a drop in power)
94 - 97 - 215hp
98 - 225hp
99 - 2004 - 260hp
Overlord - the fox's can take some boost 87-92 forged internals 93's had hyper pistons still ok but they can't take to much detonation. Although the block can only handle about 450hp then after that it's a timebomb to when it's going to split, or throw all the interals all over the road.
BINGO....94-95 had a pitiful 215 flywheel hp...but....can easily be made into monsters......and by the way they have trouble getting out of the 15 sec et range with an AVERAGE driver...87-93's will take them stock
10-25-2005, 05:26 PM
#15
Launching!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Newark ohio
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kazfan30
BINGO....94-95 had a pitiful 215 flywheel hp...but....can easily be made into monsters......and by the way they have trouble getting out of the 15 sec et range with an AVERAGE driver...87-93's will take them stock
Oh and most never did hit their mark lol.
10-25-2005, 07:31 PM
#16
TECH Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: School, Texas
Posts: 3,305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by imnotplutonium
this guy in my apt. complex drives a 5.0 mustang, that has like the 95 or 96 body style, the style with the 3 horizontal line brake lights right before they switched to the 3 vertical line brake lights. anyway, how much power are these things rated at? 305? i've been looking on the net but no luck.
10-25-2005, 09:34 PM
#18
stock 5.0 was rated 225 87-92 and 205 in 93. The change betwwen 92 and 93 is minimal and the hp loss was tabulated as a whole from 88-93 in which ford made small revisions (cam profile etc.) which changed things model to model and they chose to only reflect it in the 93'. Also, a dyno of each year model would likely show negligable difference in the years. All dyno at around 190rwhp with a T5.
10-26-2005, 05:59 AM
#19
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by imnotplutonium
ok yea 305 was way high, i was just estimating, giving ford a little credit... i guess too much. ok well i've been wanting to see if this guy wants to go but wasnt sure if i even had a chance, i've been told the 5.0's were badass, im guess just the foxbody
The 5.0's you are referring too are built on the Fox 3 platform, the later sn95 modles (95-04) are on the Fox 4 or 4th generation platform. The new 05 GT is not a Fox platform as it originated from Jaguar, but it's number is s197.
10-26-2005, 10:15 AM
#20
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canal Winchester, OH
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stock for stock...
Mustang GT's: all bark, no bite
LT1/LS1 f-bodies: all bite, no bark (actually LT1's sound ******' nice stock)
By that I mean...Mustang GT's sound fast (all bark), but stock for stock they aren't nothing to brag about (no bite). LT1/LS1 f-bodies are quiet and don't sound fast (no bark), but stock for stock they would rape a Mustang GT (all bite) with an A4 or an M6.
Mustang GT's: all bark, no bite
LT1/LS1 f-bodies: all bite, no bark (actually LT1's sound ******' nice stock)
By that I mean...Mustang GT's sound fast (all bark), but stock for stock they aren't nothing to brag about (no bite). LT1/LS1 f-bodies are quiet and don't sound fast (no bark), but stock for stock they would rape a Mustang GT (all bite) with an A4 or an M6.