me vs old 5.0
12-25-2012, 08:25 PM
#41
TECH Enthusiast
Not you directly.. Just a blanket statement to those here bagging on old school stangs and the aftermarket stuff available back then 20 years ago...
Granted it was nothing like H/C LS stuff today but **** wasn't THAT slow back then.. Damn sure no ****** Hondas beating Stangs back then... But definitely so now with turbos on everything..
Hell no one builds 302 Foxes anymore anyway.. They all have LS in em now..
Granted it was nothing like H/C LS stuff today but **** wasn't THAT slow back then.. Damn sure no ****** Hondas beating Stangs back then... But definitely so now with turbos on everything..
Hell no one builds 302 Foxes anymore anyway.. They all have LS in em now..
12-25-2012, 08:27 PM
#42
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
225 in 91-92 dual cat cars.
A friend swapped a lt1 t56 into a 350 formula....that thing moved out pretty good.
I think someone hit the Christmas punch a little to hard.
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.
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.
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
12-25-2012, 08:34 PM
#43
10 Second Club
here's a neat little synopsis of a year by year breakdown of 3rd gens vs the 5.0 clown cars.
The G92 and 1LE performance optioned 3rd Gen Camaro
Many believe that 1985-86 ushered in the rebirth of American Performance. With the introduction of GM's 5.0 liter 305ci small block TPI (Tuned Port Injection) and Ford's 5.0 liter 302ci small block EFI, the High-Output Ponycar war was in full force again... By 1990, and with GM tired of the lighter 5.0 LX having its way with the Camaro and Firebird on the street and track, the G92 option was offered as a full "Performance Package" rather than simply a performance axle option (as prior to 1990) with G92 consisting of multiple performance upgrades and weight saving options and the manual 5-speed cars getting a revised and more aggressive camshaft that raised the 5.0 liter engines to 230hp.
GM and their F-body twin Ponycars were finally getting the upper hand on the street, and getting revenge for all the 5.0 F-body automatic cruisers that were getting picked on by the infamously quick Fox-Body platformed 5.0 Mustang. The G92 code was GM's Ace up its sleeve! But Ford also had a secret weapon, the low optioned and stripped down 5.0 LX Coupe (notchback trunk edition models) that could run documented low 14 second quarter mile times, almost a half a second faster than the heavier and more common 5.0 LX hatch models, and almost a full second faster than the fully optioned and few hundred pounds heavier 5.0 Mustang GT. The only chance GM had against a 3,000 lb 5.0 liter Mustang LX Coupe (notchback) was the "trimmed of all fat" and low optioned, 3,100 lb ultra rare 1LE code Camaro. Motorweek tested a 1989 "bare-bones" 1LE optioned Camaro to the tune of a 13.9 1/4 mile time!
The 1LE was a special order Camaro reminiscent of the legendary COPO Camaros of the first Musclecar era. A very limited production Camaro that was GM's answer to the road racing Saleen Mustangs that were dominate on the showroom stock circuit. To order a 1LE performance optioned Camaro or Firebird, one had to know their way around an order sheet. By checking off the right items, you could get the hottest Camaro or Firebird to date. You had to simply order the "G92 performance package" and delete the creature comforts of air conditioning with the "C41 AC Delete option" which gives you the standard heater option... this triggered the "bare bones" version, 1LE Road Racing Performance Package. The 1LE option appears on the order sheet as a $675 "Special Performance Package" and consists of:
-Twin Piston Z51 Corvette brakes
-Aluminum Drive-shaft (prop)
-High-Flow Exhaust (dual Y-pipe w/ dual catalytic converters)
-Re-calibrated Engine PROM
-Performance Axle Ratio (5.0 = 3.42 | 5.7 = 3.23)
-Hardened Axles and Gears
-Engine Oil Cooler
-Special Swinging Fuel Baffle (prevents fuel starvation during hard cornering)
-Special Calibrated Shock Absorbers
-Fog Light Delete
-Weight Saving Options
The 1990 model year, with manual 5-speed, and equipped G92 and 1LE packages were the fastest production models of the 1985-90 five liter (305 cubic inch) version IROC-Z model years, as is the 1991-92 Tuned Port Injected Z28 models (as the IROC-Z ended in 1990 and replaced with Z28 in 1991). Here is more 3rd generation F-body knowledge and facts for 3rd gen newbies and/or Camaro enthusiasts looking for research, facts, specs, stats and information on the 3rd generation Camaro and Firebird.
Starting w/ the 1985, and the first year of the Tuned Port (TPI) system, actually outperformed the five liter Mustang GT in Motor Trend's magazine road testing in 1985 (this wasn't simply based on straight line performance) and Motor Trend crowned the new Tuned Port Injection (TPI) 5-speed IROC-Z to be the Ponycar king of the 1985 production year...
In 1986 GM changed the camshaft design for emissions purposes and lost power in the TPI engine from this cam change. Motor Trend's testing documented the 5.0 Mustang absolutely destroying the 1986 TPI Camaro IROC-Z and Z28 in road testing comparison. GM changed Camshafts the following year due to this lack of performance. The 1986 Tuned Port Injected Camaro was the least powerful of the 85-90 IROC Camaros, and road testing revealed the embarrassing 1/4 mile times for GM's Ponycar twins that particular model year...
1987 was the much anticipated release of the Corvette L98 5.7 liter 350ci TPI motor for the Camaro IROC-Z, Formula 350 and GTA Trans Am. But Motor Trend testing showed disappointing results for the 225hp 5.7 TPI Camaro with its identical 1/4 mile dragstrip times as the 5.0 EFI Mustang... handling & braking went to the LB9 optioned 5.0 powered manual 5-speed Camaro/Firebird as usual, thanks to GM's more advanced suspension and braking components over Ford's weaker handling 5.0 liter Mustang. Both the 5.7 TPI Camaro and 5.0 EFI Mustang recorded the same 14.7 quarter mile times, with handling and braking going to the Camaro...
1988 the Camaro and F-body cousin Firebird horsepower rating went up, as it did every year after... until 1990 where the TPI maxed out at 245hp for the 5.7 350ci automatic and 230hp for the 5.0 305ci 5-speed with the G92 and 1LE options (limited 1LE option F-bodies were built to compete with the Saleen Mustangs in Road racing competition) with documented 1/4 mile times of 14.6 for the 5.0/5spd model and 14.4 for the bigger 5.7/auto model, shows these were the best performing and fastest 3rd generation F-bodies produced to date... (take note that this is not the TBI (Throttle Body Injection) 170hp Camaro or Firebird, as they were the "economy version" and had around 75hp less than the performance version 245hp TPI (Tuned Port Injection) equipped F-body versions... a big contrast in performance between the TPI and TBI models) There were only four (4) 1LE models produced in 1988, with over 700 units being produced by the last year of the 3rd Gen run in 1992...
1989 and 1990 would prove to be the best performing IROC-Z models of the 3rd generation models. In 1990 the G92 option became a full performance "street" package that shocked many unsuspecting 5.0 Mustang of the time, with 230hp and 245hp, 3.23 gears or 3.42 gears, and similar 3,200 lb weight, the 5.0 Mustang guys were quickly finding out that these special optioned G92 Camaros were a different breed from the earlier run of the mill cruiser models... These were bred to race!
Now, a note for all the newbies and/or young fellas new to the 3rd generation F-bodies, or maybe thinking about restoring or building up a late 80's early 90's 3rd generation Camaro, Firebird Formula or Trans Am... just remember that TPI=good & TBI=bad if you are looking for horsepower or wanting to run with 5.0 Mustangs of the same era... the TBI will not get it done in factory or semi modded form... you will need at least the LB9 optioned 5.0 TPI with the manual 5-speed or the L98 optioned 5.7 automatic (the 350ci cars were not available with the 5-speed transmission, only the 4-speed automatic) also remember, factory stock for stock trim, the 1986 was the slowest year of production, and the 1990 IROC-Z and 1991-92 Z28 was the fastest years of production for the Tuned Port Terrors...
and I myself have owned many Camaros and Mustangs from this generation, and I love them equally... but I honestly believe that the Ford 5.0 liter 302 engine is a better all around motor versus the GM 5.0 liter 305 engine... In terms of power, torque, reliability, dependability, acceptance to bolt-on modifications... and even sound. The motors are very close in specs, but the 302 has a larger bore, and many people don't realize that the Ford 302 actually has the same size four inch (4") bore as GM's ever popular 5.7 liter 350ci small block, but has a shorter stroke versus the 305ci small block.
The featured white Camaro IROC-Z in this HUB is owned by me, so I figured I'd put that out there so you can't call foul by way of bias, towards the Mustang. These claims are simply my opinion from the years of experience I've had with these cars... and as stated earlier, I have an equal love for both of these domestic Ponycars. Certainly there is something good as well as something bad with both models. If I had to vote, judge or award these cars from this era, I'd have to give straight line "Dragstrip" power, torque and performance to the Mustang, and the "Corner Carving Road Racing" abilities of handling & braking advantage to the Camaro/Firebird.
So there you have it, some random American Musclecar opinions from John (Trae) King of nedaCFilms, Mustang-Town.com and StreetShowDriftDrags.com... and you know what people say about opinions, they are like !%#$...LOL!!! Thanks for taking the time to read my hub, hope you found some information to be useful. Feel free to ask any questions you may have by using the questionnaire on the right." ...Now go buy American!!!
The G92 and 1LE performance optioned 3rd Gen Camaro
Many believe that 1985-86 ushered in the rebirth of American Performance. With the introduction of GM's 5.0 liter 305ci small block TPI (Tuned Port Injection) and Ford's 5.0 liter 302ci small block EFI, the High-Output Ponycar war was in full force again... By 1990, and with GM tired of the lighter 5.0 LX having its way with the Camaro and Firebird on the street and track, the G92 option was offered as a full "Performance Package" rather than simply a performance axle option (as prior to 1990) with G92 consisting of multiple performance upgrades and weight saving options and the manual 5-speed cars getting a revised and more aggressive camshaft that raised the 5.0 liter engines to 230hp.
GM and their F-body twin Ponycars were finally getting the upper hand on the street, and getting revenge for all the 5.0 F-body automatic cruisers that were getting picked on by the infamously quick Fox-Body platformed 5.0 Mustang. The G92 code was GM's Ace up its sleeve! But Ford also had a secret weapon, the low optioned and stripped down 5.0 LX Coupe (notchback trunk edition models) that could run documented low 14 second quarter mile times, almost a half a second faster than the heavier and more common 5.0 LX hatch models, and almost a full second faster than the fully optioned and few hundred pounds heavier 5.0 Mustang GT. The only chance GM had against a 3,000 lb 5.0 liter Mustang LX Coupe (notchback) was the "trimmed of all fat" and low optioned, 3,100 lb ultra rare 1LE code Camaro. Motorweek tested a 1989 "bare-bones" 1LE optioned Camaro to the tune of a 13.9 1/4 mile time!
The 1LE was a special order Camaro reminiscent of the legendary COPO Camaros of the first Musclecar era. A very limited production Camaro that was GM's answer to the road racing Saleen Mustangs that were dominate on the showroom stock circuit. To order a 1LE performance optioned Camaro or Firebird, one had to know their way around an order sheet. By checking off the right items, you could get the hottest Camaro or Firebird to date. You had to simply order the "G92 performance package" and delete the creature comforts of air conditioning with the "C41 AC Delete option" which gives you the standard heater option... this triggered the "bare bones" version, 1LE Road Racing Performance Package. The 1LE option appears on the order sheet as a $675 "Special Performance Package" and consists of:
-Twin Piston Z51 Corvette brakes
-Aluminum Drive-shaft (prop)
-High-Flow Exhaust (dual Y-pipe w/ dual catalytic converters)
-Re-calibrated Engine PROM
-Performance Axle Ratio (5.0 = 3.42 | 5.7 = 3.23)
-Hardened Axles and Gears
-Engine Oil Cooler
-Special Swinging Fuel Baffle (prevents fuel starvation during hard cornering)
-Special Calibrated Shock Absorbers
-Fog Light Delete
-Weight Saving Options
The 1990 model year, with manual 5-speed, and equipped G92 and 1LE packages were the fastest production models of the 1985-90 five liter (305 cubic inch) version IROC-Z model years, as is the 1991-92 Tuned Port Injected Z28 models (as the IROC-Z ended in 1990 and replaced with Z28 in 1991). Here is more 3rd generation F-body knowledge and facts for 3rd gen newbies and/or Camaro enthusiasts looking for research, facts, specs, stats and information on the 3rd generation Camaro and Firebird.
Starting w/ the 1985, and the first year of the Tuned Port (TPI) system, actually outperformed the five liter Mustang GT in Motor Trend's magazine road testing in 1985 (this wasn't simply based on straight line performance) and Motor Trend crowned the new Tuned Port Injection (TPI) 5-speed IROC-Z to be the Ponycar king of the 1985 production year...
In 1986 GM changed the camshaft design for emissions purposes and lost power in the TPI engine from this cam change. Motor Trend's testing documented the 5.0 Mustang absolutely destroying the 1986 TPI Camaro IROC-Z and Z28 in road testing comparison. GM changed Camshafts the following year due to this lack of performance. The 1986 Tuned Port Injected Camaro was the least powerful of the 85-90 IROC Camaros, and road testing revealed the embarrassing 1/4 mile times for GM's Ponycar twins that particular model year...
1987 was the much anticipated release of the Corvette L98 5.7 liter 350ci TPI motor for the Camaro IROC-Z, Formula 350 and GTA Trans Am. But Motor Trend testing showed disappointing results for the 225hp 5.7 TPI Camaro with its identical 1/4 mile dragstrip times as the 5.0 EFI Mustang... handling & braking went to the LB9 optioned 5.0 powered manual 5-speed Camaro/Firebird as usual, thanks to GM's more advanced suspension and braking components over Ford's weaker handling 5.0 liter Mustang. Both the 5.7 TPI Camaro and 5.0 EFI Mustang recorded the same 14.7 quarter mile times, with handling and braking going to the Camaro...
1988 the Camaro and F-body cousin Firebird horsepower rating went up, as it did every year after... until 1990 where the TPI maxed out at 245hp for the 5.7 350ci automatic and 230hp for the 5.0 305ci 5-speed with the G92 and 1LE options (limited 1LE option F-bodies were built to compete with the Saleen Mustangs in Road racing competition) with documented 1/4 mile times of 14.6 for the 5.0/5spd model and 14.4 for the bigger 5.7/auto model, shows these were the best performing and fastest 3rd generation F-bodies produced to date... (take note that this is not the TBI (Throttle Body Injection) 170hp Camaro or Firebird, as they were the "economy version" and had around 75hp less than the performance version 245hp TPI (Tuned Port Injection) equipped F-body versions... a big contrast in performance between the TPI and TBI models) There were only four (4) 1LE models produced in 1988, with over 700 units being produced by the last year of the 3rd Gen run in 1992...
1989 and 1990 would prove to be the best performing IROC-Z models of the 3rd generation models. In 1990 the G92 option became a full performance "street" package that shocked many unsuspecting 5.0 Mustang of the time, with 230hp and 245hp, 3.23 gears or 3.42 gears, and similar 3,200 lb weight, the 5.0 Mustang guys were quickly finding out that these special optioned G92 Camaros were a different breed from the earlier run of the mill cruiser models... These were bred to race!
Now, a note for all the newbies and/or young fellas new to the 3rd generation F-bodies, or maybe thinking about restoring or building up a late 80's early 90's 3rd generation Camaro, Firebird Formula or Trans Am... just remember that TPI=good & TBI=bad if you are looking for horsepower or wanting to run with 5.0 Mustangs of the same era... the TBI will not get it done in factory or semi modded form... you will need at least the LB9 optioned 5.0 TPI with the manual 5-speed or the L98 optioned 5.7 automatic (the 350ci cars were not available with the 5-speed transmission, only the 4-speed automatic) also remember, factory stock for stock trim, the 1986 was the slowest year of production, and the 1990 IROC-Z and 1991-92 Z28 was the fastest years of production for the Tuned Port Terrors...
and I myself have owned many Camaros and Mustangs from this generation, and I love them equally... but I honestly believe that the Ford 5.0 liter 302 engine is a better all around motor versus the GM 5.0 liter 305 engine... In terms of power, torque, reliability, dependability, acceptance to bolt-on modifications... and even sound. The motors are very close in specs, but the 302 has a larger bore, and many people don't realize that the Ford 302 actually has the same size four inch (4") bore as GM's ever popular 5.7 liter 350ci small block, but has a shorter stroke versus the 305ci small block.
The featured white Camaro IROC-Z in this HUB is owned by me, so I figured I'd put that out there so you can't call foul by way of bias, towards the Mustang. These claims are simply my opinion from the years of experience I've had with these cars... and as stated earlier, I have an equal love for both of these domestic Ponycars. Certainly there is something good as well as something bad with both models. If I had to vote, judge or award these cars from this era, I'd have to give straight line "Dragstrip" power, torque and performance to the Mustang, and the "Corner Carving Road Racing" abilities of handling & braking advantage to the Camaro/Firebird.
So there you have it, some random American Musclecar opinions from John (Trae) King of nedaCFilms, Mustang-Town.com and StreetShowDriftDrags.com... and you know what people say about opinions, they are like !%#$...LOL!!! Thanks for taking the time to read my hub, hope you found some information to be useful. Feel free to ask any questions you may have by using the questionnaire on the right." ...Now go buy American!!!
12-25-2012, 08:35 PM
#44
Not you directly.. Just a blanket statement to those here bagging on old school stangs and the aftermarket stuff available back then 20 years ago...
Granted it was nothing like H/C LS stuff today but **** wasn't THAT slow back then.. Damn sure no ****** Hondas beating Stangs back then... But definitely so now with turbos on everything..
Hell no one builds 302 Foxes anymore anyway.. They all have LS in em now..
Granted it was nothing like H/C LS stuff today but **** wasn't THAT slow back then.. Damn sure no ****** Hondas beating Stangs back then... But definitely so now with turbos on everything..
Hell no one builds 302 Foxes anymore anyway.. They all have LS in em now..
My good friend actually owns an "aluminum gt40p heads" (Not sure wtf that meant at the time) A "nitrous" cam, gears, no a/c, no p/s, carb, electric water pump, LT's, exhaust, tubular k member, big and littles, kirkley seats, and a buncha stuff and the car pulled a fender on a bolt on pump gas srt4 from a 20 roll, srt4 spun like crazy and mustang let go top of 4th.
Given what was considered fast back then certainly isn't the same as now. Same goes for 2 decades ago.
His car is the first real domestic i rode in that made me want a RWD v8 car.
12-25-2012, 08:40 PM
#45
TECH Enthusiast
Negative. Unfortunately I'm at work and quite coherent.
You disagree with my recollection of our Mustang' performance or what?
I'm not comparing them to the performance of today's LS stuff.... Just talking about how they ran back then with the parts available. I was involved with them and raced against them from the early 90s to the late 90s when they finally started dropping out of the market to all of the mod motor junk...
5.0s would definitely ET better then they would MPH.. Their traps are/were slow compared to today's LS stuff but... They still ET'd well.. There was very little "roll" racing back then... Good hooking, good ET'ing cars won the money back then.
You disagree with my recollection of our Mustang' performance or what?
I'm not comparing them to the performance of today's LS stuff.... Just talking about how they ran back then with the parts available. I was involved with them and raced against them from the early 90s to the late 90s when they finally started dropping out of the market to all of the mod motor junk...
5.0s would definitely ET better then they would MPH.. Their traps are/were slow compared to today's LS stuff but... They still ET'd well.. There was very little "roll" racing back then... Good hooking, good ET'ing cars won the money back then.
12-25-2012, 08:43 PM
#46
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.
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.
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
LOL... You're kidding right?
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../
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../
Here is a timeslip from my 350 323 geared Formula. I could never ever duplicate though most runs mid 14s at 95 MPH:
Added some bolt ons-SLP prom(waste),ported plenum,Acel Coil,MSD box,air foil,TPIS AFPR,Under driver pulleys and SLP cold air:
Later with TPIS big mouth lower intake,Vette runners(no dings),Ported Vette heads milled,a bigger stall,boxed LCAs,gutted cats,TPIS superprofile l98 cams with 1.6 rockers,aluminum ds,Plastic Ttops I got the car to go 12s at Cecil in the fall though MPH was poor...
Not you directly.. Just a blanket statement to those here bagging on old school stangs and the aftermarket stuff available back then 20 years ago...
Granted it was nothing like H/C LS stuff today but **** wasn't THAT slow back then.. Damn sure no ****** Hondas beating Stangs back then... But definitely so now with turbos on everything..
Hell no one builds 302 Foxes anymore anyway.. They all have LS in em now..
Granted it was nothing like H/C LS stuff today but **** wasn't THAT slow back then.. Damn sure no ****** Hondas beating Stangs back then... But definitely so now with turbos on everything..
Hell no one builds 302 Foxes anymore anyway.. They all have LS in em now..
12-25-2012, 08:54 PM
#49
TECH Enthusiast
Bingo. 85 TPIs were fast for their time despite being on had with an auto. LG4s were turds and that is what most of them were.
Any 305 auto post 85 with tpi had that damn peanut cam. 305 TPI sticks(not sure what year they started maybe 88?) had the L98 cam
You are correct. However back then we didn't use those garbage GT40P heads which are barely better than stock E7s. My LX went mid 14s brand new. I got it into the low 12s n/a with heads cam on tires at full weight with stock wheels and all swaybars on. Slow no days but not bad back then
I disagree. 89 and up F body TPI cars(non GTAs) with 323 gears and dual cats were 14 second cars. I actually saw a later model speed density 350 Z28(91-92 style which I hated) run 14 flats.
Here is a timeslip from my 350 323 geared Formula. I could never ever duplicate though most runs mid 14s at 95 MPH:
Added some bolt ons-SLP prom(waste),ported plenum,Acel Coil,MSD box,air foil,TPIS AFPR,Under driver pulleys and SLP cold air:
Later with TPIS big mouth lower intake,Vette runners(no dings),Ported Vette heads milled,a bigger stall,boxed LCAs,gutted cats,TPIS superprofile l98 cams with 1.6 rockers,aluminum ds,Plastic Ttops I got the car to go 12s at Cecil in the fall though MPH was poor...
I do!!! No LS crap in my Fox!!! Old R block 331 here....
Any 305 auto post 85 with tpi had that damn peanut cam. 305 TPI sticks(not sure what year they started maybe 88?) had the L98 cam
You are correct. However back then we didn't use those garbage GT40P heads which are barely better than stock E7s. My LX went mid 14s brand new. I got it into the low 12s n/a with heads cam on tires at full weight with stock wheels and all swaybars on. Slow no days but not bad back then
I disagree. 89 and up F body TPI cars(non GTAs) with 323 gears and dual cats were 14 second cars. I actually saw a later model speed density 350 Z28(91-92 style which I hated) run 14 flats.
Here is a timeslip from my 350 323 geared Formula. I could never ever duplicate though most runs mid 14s at 95 MPH:
Added some bolt ons-SLP prom(waste),ported plenum,Acel Coil,MSD box,air foil,TPIS AFPR,Under driver pulleys and SLP cold air:
Later with TPIS big mouth lower intake,Vette runners(no dings),Ported Vette heads milled,a bigger stall,boxed LCAs,gutted cats,TPIS superprofile l98 cams with 1.6 rockers,aluminum ds,Plastic Ttops I got the car to go 12s at Cecil in the fall though MPH was poor...
I do!!! No LS crap in my Fox!!! Old R block 331 here....
I agree with you that the Formula 350s did seem to be the quickest/fastest out of all of the F body's back then.. Not sure why exactly, maybe they were just lighter but, they were faster then the GTA.
I had a 92' Camaro police intercepter( basically a 1LE with a 350). That car ran 14.40 bone stock in good winter air in Houston. Headers, y pipe with no cats, Accel super ram intake ran 13.90..slapped a Paxton on it and it went 12.90. Eventually we rebuilt the tranny and put a 2800 converter in it and the car ran 12.30@115. It was one of the faster F body's locally in 93' but.... We were getting beat by 5.0 coupes with good head/cam packages...
12-25-2012, 09:00 PM
#50
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Negative. Unfortunately I'm at work and quite coherent.
You disagree with my recollection of our Mustang' performance or what?
I'm not comparing them to the performance of today's LS stuff.... Just talking about how they ran back then with the parts available. I was involved with them and raced against them from the early 90s to the late 90s when they finally started dropping out of the market to all of the mod motor junk...
5.0s would definitely ET better then they would MPH.. Their traps are/were slow compared to today's LS stuff but... They still ET'd well.. There was very little "roll" racing back then... Good hooking, good ET'ing cars won the money back then.
You disagree with my recollection of our Mustang' performance or what?
I'm not comparing them to the performance of today's LS stuff.... Just talking about how they ran back then with the parts available. I was involved with them and raced against them from the early 90s to the late 90s when they finally started dropping out of the market to all of the mod motor junk...
5.0s would definitely ET better then they would MPH.. Their traps are/were slow compared to today's LS stuff but... They still ET'd well.. There was very little "roll" racing back then... Good hooking, good ET'ing cars won the money back then.
I do agree about all the *** *** roll racing that goes on these days. No one negotiated roll speeds back then......you went from a damn dig, the way it's suppose to be. Besides, the slower mph you started at with the stangs the better chance they had.....lol
12-25-2012, 09:36 PM
#51
88 irocs had the most aggressive cam from the factory..of the 305 cars..I had one..also had an 85, 87, and 89(all autos)..the 88 was the fastest though the 89 was a bit of a freak for the time..I got the 88 to run a 9.1x 1/8th on street tires w/nothing more than a 3.73 gear...also had a tired stock fox 5spd at the same time that would run 9.0s on street tires smh..and to my knowledge all irocs were tuned port..it def took more and better mods to make the irocs run vs the 5.0s which made all the difference
12-25-2012, 09:42 PM
#52
TECH Enthusiast
Here was the combos in our group of cars and what they ran...
90' 5.0 coupe
100k mile stock bottom end
Aluminum GT40 heads, GT40 intake, B cam, Pro M 75mm(I think) mass air. Long tubes, off road.
World class T5, king cobra clutch, 3.73
Ran 12.50s@110 on G60 mcCrearys. 1.65 60'
93 5.0 Coupe, 30k mile
Stock motor, Cobra intake, LTs, off road h pipe., race pulley/short belt. Weld skinnies/rears.
Ran 13.40@106 on motor, 12.teens@117 on 100 dry shot
91 5.0 GT
Stock bottom end, John Freed ported TFS, JF split/ported GT40 intake, x cam, LTs, 3" h pipe /1 chamber race flow masters. Tremec, 3.73, suspension, some weight reductions, welds.. Ran 11.80@114 on motor, ran 10.90 on a 150 plate kit..
I've got COUNTLESS other head/cam/bolt on cars in the mid 12s from back then...
Also had T Trim cars running mid 10s all the way back in 93...
Mustangs earned there reputation for a reason...
I freakin hated em... (I was a Chevy/Pontiac guy) and battled with these FK'Rs every weekend for a decade... Lost a lot of money to those stangs back in the mid 90s. I had a 78 Trans Am that ran 11.90s back in the early 90s and I lost to quite a few 5 liters..
I still have respect for them... Especially on a track. Same goes for Grand nationals... They ETd real well and spanked a bunch of people with minimal mods..
90' 5.0 coupe
100k mile stock bottom end
Aluminum GT40 heads, GT40 intake, B cam, Pro M 75mm(I think) mass air. Long tubes, off road.
World class T5, king cobra clutch, 3.73
Ran 12.50s@110 on G60 mcCrearys. 1.65 60'
93 5.0 Coupe, 30k mile
Stock motor, Cobra intake, LTs, off road h pipe., race pulley/short belt. Weld skinnies/rears.
Ran 13.40@106 on motor, 12.teens@117 on 100 dry shot
91 5.0 GT
Stock bottom end, John Freed ported TFS, JF split/ported GT40 intake, x cam, LTs, 3" h pipe /1 chamber race flow masters. Tremec, 3.73, suspension, some weight reductions, welds.. Ran 11.80@114 on motor, ran 10.90 on a 150 plate kit..
I've got COUNTLESS other head/cam/bolt on cars in the mid 12s from back then...
Also had T Trim cars running mid 10s all the way back in 93...
Mustangs earned there reputation for a reason...
I freakin hated em... (I was a Chevy/Pontiac guy) and battled with these FK'Rs every weekend for a decade... Lost a lot of money to those stangs back in the mid 90s. I had a 78 Trans Am that ran 11.90s back in the early 90s and I lost to quite a few 5 liters..
I still have respect for them... Especially on a track. Same goes for Grand nationals... They ETd real well and spanked a bunch of people with minimal mods..
12-25-2012, 09:47 PM
#54
my buddy had a 92 a4 z28 anniv car that had leather, bose stereo etc etc. it went 13.7s @ 99 with an aftermarket stall converter, drag radials, and a flowmaster 80 series on it, that's it. i thought that seemed respectable given the fact my 00 z28 went 14.0 @ 101 bone stock at the same track.
12-25-2012, 10:09 PM
#55
mike..do some research..most irocs were tuned port inj..88s had the highest lift though still anemic and any 91/92 I ever drove was a dog compared to the irocs..I know they were rated at higher hp #s but it never showed in my experiences
12-25-2012, 10:11 PM
#56
10 Second Club
all this 80's talk makes me want to grab an 88 5.0, a led zepplin mix tape and a jean shirt. then i'll go around telling everyone how awesome those 3 things are.
12-25-2012, 10:29 PM
#58
exactly..I think I shifted around 4400 rpms..and that wasnt early..thats where it made peak power..that was probably why so many people thought they were slow back then(trying to tach them to 5 or 5500) before they shifted
12-25-2012, 10:29 PM
#59
Research? I owned them and modded them. Most IROCs were TBI or carb(engine code L03) which was standard equipment(305 TPI option in 85 and 350 TPI option started in 87)up to 1990 which was only 3 months long because Dodge had the rights for the IROC name....is a no brainer hence the bad rap for them being slow-an LG4 with tbi or carb was a 16 second car. With original paint you always could tell by the emblems on the right rear and on the side skirts under Z28/IROC emblems. 88 and up 305 cams were no different up till 92 depending on gears and exhust used.. 85s were different than like HIO said they lost power due to the TBI cam being used(86 also added the high mounted third brake light on top of the glass one year only ewwww). Autos had the TBI cam ala Peanut cam. 87 305/350s were slower due to dual cats not being available. Some 350 TPI cars were 273 geared as well BARF. Hard judging performance of them these days and even in the last 10 years due to the age in stock trim.
In my experiences racing and owning them the speed density TPIs were faster by a hair then the MAF ones. I saw countless 305 dual car 5 speed cars run 14s in MD with speed density. Most people's biggest mistake racing them was shifting too high.
LB9(305 tpi) cam specs and as I stated a stick with dual cats 342s used the L98 cam from the 350 motor and auto used the 305 TBI one starting in 88 through 92:
http://www.gmtips.com/3rd-degree/dox/tips/cams/cams.htm
Last edited by Mike Morris; 12-25-2012 at 10:48 PM.
12-25-2012, 10:55 PM
#60
my apology on the assumption that all irocs were tuned port inj..got curious and looked up a few sources afterwards..never seen an iroc w/o tuned port injection which is very weird and coincidental..quite surprised that GM wouldnt make them all that way..I was right about the 88 cam for 305 irocs though:
"Here's a cut and paste of the cam specs from GM. Sorry if the alignment is out slightly.
Regards
Robert
Cam info on 3rd Generation camaros
0.050
Tach GM PN Lift Duration Lobe
Ylw. Red In. Ex. In. Ex. Separation (in/exh)
---- ---- -------- ---- ---- --- --- ----------
1985 (L69 and LB9)
305 AT 5000 5500 14088843 .403 .415 202 206 114.5 (115/-114)
1986 (LB9)
305 AT 4500 5000 14094097 .350 .385 178 194 109.0 (106/-112)
1987
305 AT (LB9) 4500 5000 10088155* .350 .384 179 194 109.0 (108/-112)
305 5spd / 350 AT 5000 5500 14093643* .404 .415 202 207 114.5 (115/-114)
(LB9 / L98)
305(LM1 Police Pack.) --------- 14093640* .383 .404 291 202 112 (108/-116)
1988, 1989
305 AT 4500 5000 10088155* .350 .384 179 194 109.0 (108/-112)
305 5spd / 350 AT 5000 5500 10066049* .415 .430 207 213 117.0 (116/-118)
1990-1992
305 5spd / 305 AT 4500 5000 10088155* .350 .384 179 194 109.0
305 G92 5spd / 350 AT 5000 5500 10111773* .413 .428 202 207 114.5 (116/-116)"
"Here's a cut and paste of the cam specs from GM. Sorry if the alignment is out slightly.
Regards
Robert
Cam info on 3rd Generation camaros
0.050
Tach GM PN Lift Duration Lobe
Ylw. Red In. Ex. In. Ex. Separation (in/exh)
---- ---- -------- ---- ---- --- --- ----------
1985 (L69 and LB9)
305 AT 5000 5500 14088843 .403 .415 202 206 114.5 (115/-114)
1986 (LB9)
305 AT 4500 5000 14094097 .350 .385 178 194 109.0 (106/-112)
1987
305 AT (LB9) 4500 5000 10088155* .350 .384 179 194 109.0 (108/-112)
305 5spd / 350 AT 5000 5500 14093643* .404 .415 202 207 114.5 (115/-114)
(LB9 / L98)
305(LM1 Police Pack.) --------- 14093640* .383 .404 291 202 112 (108/-116)
1988, 1989
305 AT 4500 5000 10088155* .350 .384 179 194 109.0 (108/-112)
305 5spd / 350 AT 5000 5500 10066049* .415 .430 207 213 117.0 (116/-118)
1990-1992
305 5spd / 305 AT 4500 5000 10088155* .350 .384 179 194 109.0
305 G92 5spd / 350 AT 5000 5500 10111773* .413 .428 202 207 114.5 (116/-116)"