me vs old 5.0
#21
TECH Resident
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: North Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A guy that runs at my hometown track runs an explorer intake, P-heads and B cam. I don't remember the exact times off the top of my head ( I want to say high 12/low 13s) and at (IIRC) 110mph with a best of high 111mph.
Numida isn't exactly the fastest track around, but for less than 1k in parts, which isn't a nitrous kit, going from mid 14s to high 12s is pretty decent gain. Nice car and sounds great too.
On my last 5.0, I bought a set of P-heads and an explorer intake (same as GT40 inside). Never got around to putting it on and sold them with the car, but the entire setup cost me 265.00 and it came with a 65mm throttle body (bigger than stock).
Some might say "it sucks" but look how old the technology is and all this was done by just swapping parts, no/very little porting (cleanup the cast flashing).
Obviously I like a certain engine and chasis better, hence what I own now.
Numida isn't exactly the fastest track around, but for less than 1k in parts, which isn't a nitrous kit, going from mid 14s to high 12s is pretty decent gain. Nice car and sounds great too.
On my last 5.0, I bought a set of P-heads and an explorer intake (same as GT40 inside). Never got around to putting it on and sold them with the car, but the entire setup cost me 265.00 and it came with a 65mm throttle body (bigger than stock).
Some might say "it sucks" but look how old the technology is and all this was done by just swapping parts, no/very little porting (cleanup the cast flashing).
Obviously I like a certain engine and chasis better, hence what I own now.
#22
Banned
iTrader: (3)
Realistically, those parts should get the Mustang into the mid-13's, similar to the Honda Civic with a Prelude engine because, except for the more recent Si factory stuff, those cars are actually quite slow, even when compared against a factory stock 1990 5L Mustang. Take the same Mustang and drop a 351W with aluminum heads from something like the 1995 Cobra R and the race seems more realistic. Add several modifications as is typical of the ricer crowd with their swap and suddenly you have a mid 11 second car against a mid 13 car... Would that still sound like a fair comparison?
PS the video you showed makes my point. The entire **** box is gutted. Like most, an absolute under-achiever. If all that was also done to the Mustang, the Honda crowd would complain. Oh, and Merry Christmas!
So Heads and cam and full bolt ons isn't enough for a bolt on swapped honda?
Regardless of the car being gutted AT MOST theres 60lbs out of the rear of that car, with a 150+ passanger it defeats the purpose. You really think 60lbs would've stoped the train he put on that fox with in 2 gears?
Guys new setup goes 11s at 114 with full interior bolt on k24. This was just an example.
Jesus christ you are upset.
#24
My friend had a 85 T/A that had a cam only 305, I out ran pretty bad with my cam only 302 in my 84 GT, that he decided that he wanted to try against my girlfriends bone stock 89 LX 5.0. With her driving and me in the passenger seat telling her when to shift, she out ran him by more than a car length.
#25
I simply said what i see since on here hondas are dog ****, and dog **** NA hondas usually drag gt40pos setups its pretty self explanatory.
So Heads and cam and full bolt ons isn't enough for a bolt on swapped honda?
Regardless of the car being gutted AT MOST theres 60lbs out of the rear of that car, with a 150+ passanger it defeats the purpose. You really think 60lbs would've stoped the train he put on that fox with in 2 gears?
Guys new setup goes 11s at 114 with full interior bolt on k24. This was just an example.
Jesus christ you are upset.
So Heads and cam and full bolt ons isn't enough for a bolt on swapped honda?
Regardless of the car being gutted AT MOST theres 60lbs out of the rear of that car, with a 150+ passanger it defeats the purpose. You really think 60lbs would've stoped the train he put on that fox with in 2 gears?
Guys new setup goes 11s at 114 with full interior bolt on k24. This was just an example.
Jesus christ you are upset.
#27
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think part of his point was that your initial comment was completely irrelevant. You take whatever chance you can get to compare something to a "bolt-on/swapped Honda," and then post videos. Completely out of the blue.
#28
10 Second Club
#29
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
My friend had a 85 T/A that had a cam only 305, I out ran pretty bad with my cam only 302 in my 84 GT, that he decided that he wanted to try against my girlfriends bone stock 89 LX 5.0. With her driving and me in the passenger seat telling her when to shift, she out ran him by more than a car length.
Most of the IROC's were'nt even tpi cars. That gave them a bad rap.
#30
Banned
iTrader: (3)
If hondas (By everyones standards on here) are slow, then what does that make a Gt40p cammed bolt on Foxbody?
Thats it, nothing more nothing less.
I always bring up hondas cause up until 5-6 months ago i owned one and was around them 24/7. All of my friends own hondas so thats what i usually see runs of, if it were mustangs id use mustangs, if it were evo's id use evo's, if it were subies id use subies to get my point across. Simple as that.
#31
10 Second Club
My dad bought a new 85 IROC. We had a few good runs with some old foxes but none would out run it, really only 1 stayed even and it had mods with the IROC being stock. But back then the aftermarket was not what it is now for the 5.0 fox. My old 305 Monza(factory v8 car) gave them fits with just a 4bblcarb/intake. Dads IROC would smoke my Monza pretty good from a dig.
Most of the IROC's were'nt even tpi cars. That gave them a bad rap.
Most of the IROC's were'nt even tpi cars. That gave them a bad rap.
and 3rd gens kept getting faster as the 80's went on, and the 5.0's got slower. 5.7 tpi's and 5.0 lx's were a good race. if GM did do one of their usual **** ups and built the 5.7 with a 5 speed it would have been no contest.
#33
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
It woulda been nice to have a 350 tpi m5 car. 85 TPI cars had the most powerful 305(215hp) up until 90 so dads car ran pretty dam good for the day. The 86-89 tpi 305's were kinda poopy, they were 20hp off the 85 cars. That's pretty big when there is'nt alot of power there anyway.
#34
10 Second Club
It woulda been nice to have a 350 tpi m5 car. 85 TPI cars had the most powerful 305(215hp) up until 90 so dads car ran pretty dam good for the day. The 86-89 tpi 305's were kinda poopy, they were 20hp off the 85 cars. That's pretty big when there is'nt alot of power there anyway.
i think the later speed density 305's were up to 235 hp.
#36
On The Tree
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wilmywood NC
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are 100% correct.
One of my good friends in high school, his dad owned a dealership and had one of his mechanics swap over a new 350 IROC or Z28 (can't remember which) to a 5 speed. That car would flat out get down. My good friend had that car and a loaded up white T/A in high school. He daily drove the T/A, but when somebody wanted to run, he would drive the 350 5 speed car to school.
#37
TECH Enthusiast
Man... You guys must have some fucked off mustangs up there...
Hell damn near 20 years ago we were running 12.50s at the slowest with 5.0 Coupes using GT40 heads, "B" cam and a GT40 intake.. Every freakin stang in town could run atleast that or better way back then.. I had atleast 10 buddies with 5.0 Mustangs in the early to mid 90s running the GT40/B cam setup on 100k+ mileage mustangs and all were mid to low 12s..
We had a few stock bottom end 5.0s running 11s as well with TFS heads/ported GT40 intakes and X cams... And these were stick cars.. No doubt autos with big converters would have ran quicker.
Not sure what you all have going on up there but..... Don't knock the **** that's been working for 2 decades...lol
Hell damn near 20 years ago we were running 12.50s at the slowest with 5.0 Coupes using GT40 heads, "B" cam and a GT40 intake.. Every freakin stang in town could run atleast that or better way back then.. I had atleast 10 buddies with 5.0 Mustangs in the early to mid 90s running the GT40/B cam setup on 100k+ mileage mustangs and all were mid to low 12s..
We had a few stock bottom end 5.0s running 11s as well with TFS heads/ported GT40 intakes and X cams... And these were stick cars.. No doubt autos with big converters would have ran quicker.
Not sure what you all have going on up there but..... Don't knock the **** that's been working for 2 decades...lol
#38
Banned
iTrader: (3)
Man... You guys must have some fucked off mustangs up there...
Hell damn near 20 years ago we were running 12.50s at the slowest with 5.0 Coupes using GT40 heads, "B" cam and a GT40 intake.. Every freakin stang in town could run atleast that or better way back then.. I had atleast 10 buddies with 5.0 Mustangs in the early to mid 90s running the GT40/B cam setup on 100k+ mileage mustangs and all were mid to low 12s..
We had a few stock bottom end 5.0s running 11s as well with TFS heads/ported GT40 intakes and X cams... And these were stick cars.. No doubt autos with big converters would have ran quicker.
Not sure what you all have going on up there but..... Don't knock the **** that's been working for 2 decades...lol
Hell damn near 20 years ago we were running 12.50s at the slowest with 5.0 Coupes using GT40 heads, "B" cam and a GT40 intake.. Every freakin stang in town could run atleast that or better way back then.. I had atleast 10 buddies with 5.0 Mustangs in the early to mid 90s running the GT40/B cam setup on 100k+ mileage mustangs and all were mid to low 12s..
We had a few stock bottom end 5.0s running 11s as well with TFS heads/ported GT40 intakes and X cams... And these were stick cars.. No doubt autos with big converters would have ran quicker.
Not sure what you all have going on up there but..... Don't knock the **** that's been working for 2 decades...lol
#39
TECH Enthusiast
305 F body's ran mid 15s at best.. Hell the 350 L98 Irocs and Trans Am GTAs BARELY dipped into the 14s... And that was on a good night.
My dad bought an 85' L98 Vette new and we ran that thing in 90' and it went 15.0@92 mph..
TPI cars were dogs, all of them.. Hell they needed blowers on them to run in the high 12s most of the time../
#40
10 Second Club
Man... You guys must have some fucked off mustangs up there...
Hell damn near 20 years ago we were running 12.50s at the slowest with 5.0 Coupes using GT40 heads, "B" cam and a GT40 intake.. Every freakin stang in town could run atleast that or better way back then.. I had atleast 10 buddies with 5.0 Mustangs in the early to mid 90s running the GT40/B cam setup on 100k+ mileage mustangs and all were mid to low 12s..
We had a few stock bottom end 5.0s running 11s as well with TFS heads/ported GT40 intakes and X cams... And these were stick cars.. No doubt autos with big converters would have ran quicker.
Not sure what you all have going on up there but..... Don't knock the **** that's been working for 2 decades...lol
Hell damn near 20 years ago we were running 12.50s at the slowest with 5.0 Coupes using GT40 heads, "B" cam and a GT40 intake.. Every freakin stang in town could run atleast that or better way back then.. I had atleast 10 buddies with 5.0 Mustangs in the early to mid 90s running the GT40/B cam setup on 100k+ mileage mustangs and all were mid to low 12s..
We had a few stock bottom end 5.0s running 11s as well with TFS heads/ported GT40 intakes and X cams... And these were stick cars.. No doubt autos with big converters would have ran quicker.
Not sure what you all have going on up there but..... Don't knock the **** that's been working for 2 decades...lol
you talkin aboot hondas?