stock 2000 Z28 vs stock 1987 5.0
09-15-2011, 04:29 PM
#41
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Truck runs good from a roll..I said from a roll you uncomprehending idiot. A stock 87-93 stang might run low 15's 88-90mph in the qtr. They do not pull gret out the back. My truck runs 86mph and it's harder to 6k moving from a stop. It's a close run....and no it does'nt have a ls6.....I wish it did.
As for what they'd run... You're showing your lack of experience along with your lack of knowledge. Clearly you never saw them at the track back then. They'd run 14's ALL DAY LONG with a 5spd, bone stock.
"In every way the new 5.0 feels like an amplification of the old 5.0 — the difference between trotting and galloping. Car and Driver measured the 1989 Mustang GT (functionally identical to the '92) to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds and timed the car through the quarter-mile in 14.7 seconds at 94 mph." -InsideLine magazine. That was in an article about the 2011 GT vs the 92 GT.
That was one of literally millions of passes made with those cars. They were 14 second cars with any kind of driver. From a roll, you'd still have your *** handed to you because they'd go 130mph and your truck won't.
You should make a point to clarify, yours isn't the D-max, but the 6.0L gasoline burner... It's not quick or fast... and it never will be.
09-15-2011, 04:55 PM
#42
09-15-2011, 05:12 PM
#45
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
There are ONLY 2 ways you're truck is keeping up with a 5.0L Mustang. 1 is if you dropped it off a cliff. 2 is if that car isn't racing back.
As for what they'd run... You're showing your lack of experience along with your lack of knowledge. Clearly you never saw them at the track back then. They'd run 14's ALL DAY LONG with a 5spd, bone stock.
"In every way the new 5.0 feels like an amplification of the old 5.0 — the difference between trotting and galloping. Car and Driver measured the 1989 Mustang GT (functionally identical to the '92) to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds and timed the car through the quarter-mile in 14.7 seconds at 94 mph." -InsideLine magazine. That was in an article about the 2011 GT vs the 92 GT.
That was one of literally millions of passes made with those cars. They were 14 second cars with any kind of driver. From a roll, you'd still have your *** handed to you because they'd go 130mph and your truck won't.
You should make a point to clarify, yours isn't the D-max, but the 6.0L gasoline burner... It's not quick or fast... and it never will be.
As for what they'd run... You're showing your lack of experience along with your lack of knowledge. Clearly you never saw them at the track back then. They'd run 14's ALL DAY LONG with a 5spd, bone stock.
"In every way the new 5.0 feels like an amplification of the old 5.0 — the difference between trotting and galloping. Car and Driver measured the 1989 Mustang GT (functionally identical to the '92) to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds and timed the car through the quarter-mile in 14.7 seconds at 94 mph." -InsideLine magazine. That was in an article about the 2011 GT vs the 92 GT.
That was one of literally millions of passes made with those cars. They were 14 second cars with any kind of driver. From a roll, you'd still have your *** handed to you because they'd go 130mph and your truck won't.
You should make a point to clarify, yours isn't the D-max, but the 6.0L gasoline burner... It's not quick or fast... and it never will be.
A friend had a 5.0 with 3.73, cold air intake, flowmaster cat-back, big n little welds. From a 25-30 roll to about 100 he had by about 2.5-3 cars. His car ran a 14.4 with those mods. Besides that I use to wax the **** out of those old 5.0's with my old factory v8 Monza after I put a 4bbl on it. It ran a 15.1@93. As far as I'm concerned they were'nt very impressive. They had good take off and that was it.
Mr. have nothing that runs.
09-15-2011, 06:08 PM
#48
That is some groundbreaking information. No **** they were slow jesus they only had 200 Hp or so, at the crank. A 6.0 truck isn't blindingly fast either. BTW you couldn't offend me its the ******* internet.
09-15-2011, 06:15 PM
#49
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: richmond,va
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didnt say it was fast but I do believe he could keep up with if not stay infront of a 5.0 Plus a 2500 weighs more than 5000 lbs so its pretty quick for it bein so damn big
09-15-2011, 06:16 PM
#50
I know exactly what it is you stupid ****. It says 6.0 in my sig dumbass. I've raced 5.0's and the truck will do over 120... although I did'nt say we raced till ultimate top speed.
A friend had a 5.0 with 3.73, cold air intake, flowmaster cat-back, big n little welds. From a 25-30 roll to about 100 he had by about 2.5-3 cars. His car ran a 14.4 with those mods. Besides that I use to wax the **** out of those old 5.0's with my old factory v8 Monza after I put a 4bbl on it. It ran a 15.1@93. As far as I'm concerned they were'nt very impressive. They had good take off and that was it.
Mr. have nothing that runs.
A friend had a 5.0 with 3.73, cold air intake, flowmaster cat-back, big n little welds. From a 25-30 roll to about 100 he had by about 2.5-3 cars. His car ran a 14.4 with those mods. Besides that I use to wax the **** out of those old 5.0's with my old factory v8 Monza after I put a 4bbl on it. It ran a 15.1@93. As far as I'm concerned they were'nt very impressive. They had good take off and that was it.
Mr. have nothing that runs.
Come on man, act alittle older than a 17 year old.
09-15-2011, 06:41 PM
#51
It's lines like this that keep me coming back!
09-15-2011, 06:44 PM
#53
Teching In
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Matewan,WV
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 89 GT came factory with a whopping 225 flywheel hp. Running through a smooth shifting weak *** T5. They had there day when GM had the 305 tunedport P.O.S. Then bam the LT1 was introduced to the camaro. Foxes are a blast to drive and most should agree they produce a great sound with exhaust system. I also don't think it was a waste of time as long as you was having fun.
09-15-2011, 07:23 PM
#55
