The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

So you didn't read the thread well and now look like an idiot. Good job. BTW there isn't a duramax in my driveway but there is a powerstroke.

85mustang351

Aww ur a sweetheart. Will u be my friend?

85mustang351

Unfortunately i read entirely too much of this ridiculous thread. By the end of page three i got dumber and apparantly lost my ability to distiguish words and brands of diesel trucks. Please accept my most heart felt appology for offending your vast knowledge of diesel engines.

85mustang351

apology. damn P's they will get ya every time

The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

You talking to yourself again? I'm not offended I'm just ******* with you Ford Boy.

85mustang351

Cheers bro. Its a boring thursday night.

The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

Yes sir, it is.

It'llrun

Blah blah blah... It's obvious that not everyone bothers to read your sig. Regardless, you're still talking trash and you MUST be the only person on planet earth you could install a 4bbl carburetor on a 2bbl intake... Then, the only person who could go from 17's to 15.1 by having done sso... God knows it would've run 9's if you'd simply swapped the heads as well...

A stock Fox body 5L with a 5spd would smash your truck in a drag race, regarless what you claim. 16.1 isn't in the realm of a well driven 5.0L. In the quote I provided, a magazine managed 14.7 from a 92GT... That's nearly 1.5 seconds quicker than your truck, but somehow you are only 3 lengths behind... Plus 8 and you're about right. They were never the quickest car in the world, but they were clearly quicker than any stock 6L 3/4 ton by a bunch. The same goes for a roll race. You're just doing your usual... talking trash thinking everyone is as clueless as you are.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

sorry Stopsign...I was right, he is a stupid ****. Who in their right mind would put a 4bbl on a 2bbl intake? And he's a magazine racer too.....cause if the mag said it then it must be true......and he can't comprehend...I SAID ROLL RACE!!

ScreaminRedZ

iTrader: (3)

It may look like crap, but it's the effort you put in that counts. Ricers know what I'm talking about

assasinator

i think we are all holding on a little tight to INTERNET arguing. to take words on this board personal, you have a few screws loose. i know i do.

The Manalishi

iTrader: (3)

I've got the ricer sig, awesome!

85mustang351

Ask any ricer, any real ricer.It doesnt matter if your sig wins by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning.

It'llrun

Nobody CARES what you said. You're nothing more than a big mouth here, wishing you were half as bright as the next person.

I'm TELLING YOU that your truck WILL NOT reach 120mph on its own... It WON'T because it lacks the necessary power to get there! It won't do it!

It also WON'T outrun even a BONE STOCK OHV 5.0L Mustang FROM ANY SPEED TO ANY SPEED! It's too slow to do that! You can lie all day long, KID, but you're only lying to yourself because too many of have been around long enough to know the difference between truth and your lies.

Calling names only serves to prove 1 thing... You know you've lost the debate. I can resort to that too, but I don't make a habit of it like you and a couple other CHILDREN here do.

Stopsign32v

iTrader: (1)

nmbr5ml

All the "mid-14s" stuff only applies to 5.0s with a manual transmission. My first car was an 88 Mustang GT with an automatic trans. Not only did I get smoked by an older GT with a 5 speed, but I got beat by all the camaros/trans ams of that period, and an 84 Corvette, BADLY. I would estimate it was a mid-16 second car. Seriously it was that bad, and there was nothing wrong with the car. Probably would've picked up a lot from tuning/modding, but I lacked the skills/$$$ for that at the time.

It is totally believable that just about any modern pickup with a V8 could hold its own against a stock 87-93 5.0 with an automatic transmission.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

And You know because you've been in my truck??? That's what I thought you don't know. **** you and your kid bullshit.....What do you have??? Nothing, you just like everyone else's **** with more than 300 lb ft...great sig

It'llrun

Indeed.
They were slower, for sure... Not 16's slow, but slower. I got a 91 and it ran 14's once I learned how to shift it manually. The average 3rd gen F-body wouldn't be much of a concern, but any 350 powered version would, as well as a few HO 305's and any GTA.

Eh, not really. Even the AOD cars would run 130. You'd probably burn up the transmission keeping it up there, but it would get there. There are few modern trucks able to get there.

Stop being a dope, if you can. You talk more trash than Cassius Clay in his prime! Difference is, he could back it up. You're merely an internet wannabe warrior and you get offended way too easily for your own good. One day, you'll look back and wonder why you couldn't prevent your typing finger from making such an idiot of you...

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

Yea I'm talking trash. I run evrything I own at the track and it's in the sig. Look what your sig says "I like all RWD V8 cars with at least 300 lb ft of torque.". Pretty easy to see who the trash talker is.

nmbr5ml

True. I was talking about the average 35 mph to 90 or so mph street encounter. My 2006 Tundra is a beast compared to that old Mustang I had, but when speeds get over 100 even a riced-out Ford Probe will start gaining on it. Ask me how I know.

Oh, and I can attest that my 88 5.0 would go 130, at least indicated ground speed.