I have to bust on the Crustang...
11-30-2003, 09:27 PM
#21
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they simply made poor mod selection
LTs, ORX, mufflers, Pulleys, timing adjuster, 4.10s
all can be found used for an price and not break your bank.
its a lighter car, the hp goes further
LTs, ORX, mufflers, Pulleys, timing adjuster, 4.10s
all can be found used for an price and not break your bank.
its a lighter car, the hp goes further
11-30-2003, 09:30 PM
#22
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaBalckIce
This reminds me of a story of a night down at Cecil. I saw this group of kids probably like 10 about 8 guys and 2 girls following this fox body cobra through the pits. Everytime it moved they all moved and stood next to it. Then i see it ready to run and all the kids standing around watching. The cobra does a nice long burnout and I was like it must be pretty fast. Well it runs a 14.14 and all the kids just looked at each other and looked like they were making excuses to each other. To me it was like they all like hailed this kid for his "fast" car or they had a hand in building it and they just got the biggest disapointment in their life. I guess the catback and CAI didnt give them the 100hp they were expecting. These are the kids that need help or a little more info. Be realistic how fast your car is and understand that what most companies say about their aftermarket products are 9 times out of 10 waaaaay overrated. Not bashing on all mustangs cause I liked how the cobra looked but everyone really need to start being honest/ and read up a little more. I like alot of other people on this board would rather just stick with an f-bod. But i def. wouldnt mind a new cobra in the garage.
thats why there are so many new GTs going high 14s and slower......
12-01-2003, 12:27 AM
#25
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by 95Snoozer
or, the he was like the 99 percent of mustang owners who cant drive and launch worth a **** and make the car look bad.
thats why there are so many new GTs going high 14s and slower......
thats why there are so many new GTs going high 14s and slower......
12-01-2003, 12:36 AM
#26
STF Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mario i just noticed your sig is clickable. your car's name is mildred? tell me it has a more interesting origin than the fact that the car is "mild red"?
i dig the stoned pic. your eyes arn't bloodshot enough though. you need to pack annother bowl man.
i dig the stoned pic. your eyes arn't bloodshot enough though. you need to pack annother bowl man.
12-01-2003, 12:39 AM
#27
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by Skarecrow
mario i just noticed your sig is clickable. your car's name is mildred? tell me it has a more interesting origin than the fact that the car is "mild red"?
i dig the stoned pic. your eyes arn't bloodshot enough though. you need to pack annother bowl man.
i dig the stoned pic. your eyes arn't bloodshot enough though. you need to pack annother bowl man.
12-01-2003, 01:34 PM
#31
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: michigan; where even our licens plates rust
Posts: 1,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah they were choking it to death with crappy headers. besides that i think hot rod mag was pointing out that the stang is a little more versital than the f-body. yeah the f's have higher numbers from the factory and have a great reputation for reacting well to a couple of bolt ons. but what pisses me off about it is solid rear axle 
you have to realy tinker with the suspension in order to get it to handel close to what you want.
you have to realy tinker with the suspension in order to get it to handel close to what you want.
12-01-2003, 02:55 PM
#32
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: houston
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 2v was never meant to be a hp motor,thats why they made the 4v motor.sure thare are some strong 2v,s out there(there is a single turbo 2002 drag radial car that has gone 8.77 at i think 160mph-also there are a couple of 11 second n/a ones)but for power you should look to the 4v engine.
already there is a 6 second 4v
there are multiple 4v's in the 7's.
there is a few n/a 4v's in the 9's(mike teminsky has gone 9.33)
one guy on the corral has a 4v 5.4 that has gone 10.42 at 131,all motor,3370lbs,a/c power steering and so on.
there are many other 4vs out there just dont have time to put them all down.
already there is a 6 second 4v
there are multiple 4v's in the 7's.
there is a few n/a 4v's in the 9's(mike teminsky has gone 9.33)
one guy on the corral has a 4v 5.4 that has gone 10.42 at 131,all motor,3370lbs,a/c power steering and so on.
there are many other 4vs out there just dont have time to put them all down.
12-01-2003, 03:16 PM
#33
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Atlanta,Ga
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by roger
the 2v was never meant to be a hp motor,thats why they made the 4v motor.sure thare are some strong 2v,s out there(there is a single turbo 2002 drag radial car that has gone 8.77 at i think 160mph-also there are a couple of 11 second n/a ones)but for power you should look to the 4v engine.
already there is a 6 second 4v
there are multiple 4v's in the 7's.
there is a few n/a 4v's in the 9's(mike teminsky has gone 9.33)
one guy on the corral has a 4v 5.4 that has gone 10.42 at 131,all motor,3370lbs,a/c power steering and so on.
there are many other 4vs out there just dont have time to put them all down.
already there is a 6 second 4v
there are multiple 4v's in the 7's.
there is a few n/a 4v's in the 9's(mike teminsky has gone 9.33)
one guy on the corral has a 4v 5.4 that has gone 10.42 at 131,all motor,3370lbs,a/c power steering and so on.
there are many other 4vs out there just dont have time to put them all down.
Yea we all need to get a 4v to make power
.Guess its all posion it doesnt matter what you build as long as you like it.A lot of guys hate mustangs ,just like others hate ls1's.
Me-im not picky i kill them all.
12-01-2003, 03:29 PM
#34
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: houston
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bill i dont mean to beat on the 2v's obviously yours is very fast and yes i know there are alot of fast 2v's out there.personally i would love to try and build a fast n/a'd one just because its such an underdog.
but you do have to agree with me that the general intension for the motor was not high hp numbers.
also if it came down to money i wouldnt build a 4v,2v or a ls1....i would just go back to a 5.0
but you do have to agree with me that the general intension for the motor was not high hp numbers.
also if it came down to money i wouldnt build a 4v,2v or a ls1....i would just go back to a 5.0
12-01-2003, 06:31 PM
#35
STF Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if i'm going ford, i'd skip the 5.0 and start with a 9.5" deck 351w block. bore & stroke it out to 426ci, drop on a set of AFR 205s and an edlebrock victor jr intake, get a nice compcams xtreme energy cam, and then proceed to destroy my tranny and rear end. 
or if it's a gm tranny and rearend i want to destroy, i could start with a ls1 block bored and stroked out to 427ci, put on AFR 225cc heads, a ported ls6 intake, have my pick of cams, and then drop more drivetrain parts all over the street.
or if it's a gm tranny and rearend i want to destroy, i could start with a ls1 block bored and stroked out to 427ci, put on AFR 225cc heads, a ported ls6 intake, have my pick of cams, and then drop more drivetrain parts all over the street.
12-01-2003, 07:42 PM
#36
Administrator
So we are dreaming here huh? Let's see...I'd like a 390ci motor with let's say 50psi of boost. Sort of like the one that propels this car to 7.17 @ 200mph using a mere 2,100rwhp.
Let's see...I'd like a 390ci motor with let's say 50psi of boost. Sort of like the one that propels this car to 7.17 @ 200mph using a mere 2,100rwhp.
12-01-2003, 07:54 PM
#38
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Atlanta,Ga
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by roger
bill i dont mean to beat on the 2v's obviously yours is very fast and yes i know there are alot of fast 2v's out there.personally i would love to try and build a fast n/a'd one just because its such an underdog.
but you do have to agree with me that the general intension for the motor was not high hp numbers.
also if it came down to money i wouldnt build a 4v,2v or a ls1....i would just go back to a 5.0
but you do have to agree with me that the general intension for the motor was not high hp numbers.
also if it came down to money i wouldnt build a 4v,2v or a ls1....i would just go back to a 5.0
At first no ,it was designed as a 5.0 replacement in the ford line.But in the last few years(in gt and cobra alike) there have been leaps and bounds in the modular world.
The "modular" motor was designed with parts that can be used on more than one car line.No with out a power adder its no match for a ls1.But that doesnt make it any less of a motor.
12-01-2003, 08:34 PM
#39
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by white99gt
At first no ,it was designed as a 5.0 replacement in the ford line.But in the last few years(in gt and cobra alike) there have been leaps and bounds in the modular world.
The "modular" motor was designed with parts that can be used on more than one car line.No with out a power adder its no match for a ls1.But that doesnt make it any less of a motor.
The "modular" motor was designed with parts that can be used on more than one car line.No with out a power adder its no match for a ls1.But that doesnt make it any less of a motor.
