Mach at the track
#3844
What "LT1 nonsense" are ya speaking of?
The fact of the matter is, that the 96Z28 was and remains faster than any NA Mustang produced throughout the 00s. I know that because I owned and still own, a 96Z and raced every NA variation of Mustang and didn't just beat them... I destroyed them. They were not even remotely competitive.
Now the 97z was faster than the 96. The 98 faster than the 97 and so on. Ergo, the Mustang did NOT own the Camaro in the 00s.
The simple fact is that the Camaro is superior machine to the Mustang.
The fact of the matter is, that the 96Z28 was and remains faster than any NA Mustang produced throughout the 00s. I know that because I owned and still own, a 96Z and raced every NA variation of Mustang and didn't just beat them... I destroyed them. They were not even remotely competitive.
Now the 97z was faster than the 96. The 98 faster than the 97 and so on. Ergo, the Mustang did NOT own the Camaro in the 00s.
The simple fact is that the Camaro is superior machine to the Mustang.
#3846
Well, The General Surrendered the field in '02, freeing up the Mustang to pretty much own EIGHT YEARS of that decades production…
But I picked up my '96Z in '05, with 150k on her, rode hard and put up wet EVERYDAY for 9 years… and I didn't see ANY Mustang Tail lights… All those miles and otherwise stock except for the K&N CAI, the '05 Mustang GT was a non-starter, same with the 06.
Once I rebuilt her, cammed up, geared up and finished out the balance of the bolt-ons, the stock blown Mustangs didn't do much better.
So, WTH are ya talkin' about?
But I picked up my '96Z in '05, with 150k on her, rode hard and put up wet EVERYDAY for 9 years… and I didn't see ANY Mustang Tail lights… All those miles and otherwise stock except for the K&N CAI, the '05 Mustang GT was a non-starter, same with the 06.
Once I rebuilt her, cammed up, geared up and finished out the balance of the bolt-ons, the stock blown Mustangs didn't do much better.
So, WTH are ya talkin' about?
Nice wing btw...
#3847
Actually the 2v 4.6's were faster than the 5.0 in the sn95 cars. The 5.0's started falling off in the fox's about 1990. The cars picked up a little weight and light weight was the only thing really goin for those cars.
#3848
Where did the 90+ fox get more weight from?
#3850
#3851
They tried to make the fox not such a tin can from 90 on. They also picked up a airbag.
even the 96-98 2v's were rated at more power than the 5.0 was. The only good part about the sn95 5.0 cars were at least they had a little potential.
even the 96-98 2v's were rated at more power than the 5.0 was. The only good part about the sn95 5.0 cars were at least they had a little potential.
#3853
#3855
#3858
I have not seen any differences except for the airbag in 90 and the Pony wheels in 91. I have owned a few over the years. The old 5.0 and the 96 4.6 were both rated at the same hp. You are correct on the 5.0. They still have a ton more potential than a 2v, lol.
#3859
Now except for the occassional bracket racers down at the track, that car still hasn't been beat by a Mustang.
But I've only raced a couple of hundred examples in that time...
But in my defense, I have kept up with the times with proper maintenance, and installed a modest modification here and there where it was believed to be necessary to keep up with the fast cars. Not that that's relevant here... But it wouldn't be fair to not mention it.
Last edited by OVA1; 08-01-2013 at 01:47 PM.
#3860
Except for the bracket racers down at the track. That car still hasn't been beat by a Mustang.
But I've only raced a couple of hundred examples in that time... Andion fairness, I've kept up with the times with proper maintenance, and a modest modification here and there. So she's a little faster now... And has no trouble with the blown Mustangs.
But I've only raced a couple of hundred examples in that time... Andion fairness, I've kept up with the times with proper maintenance, and a modest modification here and there. So she's a little faster now... And has no trouble with the blown Mustangs.