Bolt on 5.0 vs Cam only C5Z
#361
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rent Free in Hio's Mind
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 36 Likes
on
31 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
You're right, HiO. It obviously wasn't a necessity. I mean, ****, the 98-02 Cuhmuro's were the duck's guts and they went the way of the pet rock for the 2003 model year! Good point!
#364
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Okay, you're back for a second. I am pretty sure when you first started posting, we went back and forth about Ford Chevy **** when finally people saw your posts and thought you were joking...then they figured out you were really just ignorant. I'm not doing that again ![Icon Lol](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/icon_lol.gif)
You saying "truth" is like HiO when he claims what he posts are "facts".
As for the 86 Rustang, fixed my fuel pressure problem yesterday, ordered tailpipes today, making a date with the exhaust shop to install it here shortly. Picking headlight and taillight bulbs up after work today, and when the weather isn't 15 degrees hopefully I can meet up with my guy and get it tuned. After it's running smoothly after the tune, next order of business will be to have the awful black side stripes removed or painted over.
![Icon Lol](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/icon_lol.gif)
You saying "truth" is like HiO when he claims what he posts are "facts".
As for the 86 Rustang, fixed my fuel pressure problem yesterday, ordered tailpipes today, making a date with the exhaust shop to install it here shortly. Picking headlight and taillight bulbs up after work today, and when the weather isn't 15 degrees hopefully I can meet up with my guy and get it tuned. After it's running smoothly after the tune, next order of business will be to have the awful black side stripes removed or painted over.
Thats good man on your car, I myself am having issues with my car but price we all pay to go fast its always something that needs to he done!
#365
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
On the grammar front idc how i spell or how i structure my sentences or paragraphs in here. I have so far passed my College level English classes with B averages. In the military i wrote and spoke differently then i do on here as well. Not saying i don't need improvement because i do as like everyone here does imo. We are humans therefore there is always room for improvement just some more than other's.
#366
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Also to all the mustang guys or gals (if there is mustang ladies on here) there is a well known shop i drive by everyday heading to college they specialize in old and new mustangs mainly older but if you are looking for a shop that has extra parts let me know. Ill take pics of there cars they work on and if im not mistaken they even sell them. Just letting y'all know is all.
#368
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Why would they? You seem to be more than a little thick in the head, so I'll go slowly. This has nothing to do with "nut-swinging," so just try and comprehend. The Mustang sold FOUR TIMES as many cars as the Camaro and the Firebird COMBINED during the '90s. Now while (like I've said countless times) it would have been awesome if the SN95 cars had more power, they had no actual REASON to do so. It's this thing called profit, and they were making enough of that to not care if the Mustang GT got raped at every stoplight. To say that they "couldn't" make a faster car is one of the most ridiculous things you've ever said, and that means a lot considering you just DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED yourself in another thread TODAY, and couldn't even admit it.
#369
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The mustang obviously was under power during the 90s and early 2000s and yet it was still being sold. That being said could Ford have made more power for it yes but at what cost? I know if i was selling a product that was underperforming but still making bank why spend millions if not billions redesigning it when They where clearly making Millions if not Billions off of it. Also i just can't figure out if another car is around the same price but is faster why not buy it? Besides being brand loyal i couldn't see why not. Either way this war will never end and it makes for better performance options for us. Thank you Ford for forcing GM/Chevy to redue the 5th gen
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
#370
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Edit: Dug a little deeper, and apparently my memory was a little sketchy. It was during the last few years of F-body sales that the Mustang outsold the twins by a large combined margin. 3-5 times as many Mustangs sold as Camaros 99-01 (didn't see '02 figures). Here's the figures from the beginning;
Year: Mustang/Camaro
64:*121,583/NA
65: 559,451/NA
66: 607,568/NA
67: 474,121/*220,906
68: 317,404/ 235,147
68: 299,824/ 243,065
69: 299,824/ 243,065
70: 190,727/ 124,901
71:*149,678/*114,630
72: 125,093/ 114,630 (not a typo!)
73: 134,867/ 96,751
74:*385,993/ 151,008
75: 188,575/ 145,770
76: 187,567/ 182,959
77: 153,173/ 218,858
78: 192,410/ 272,631
79:*369,936/ 282,571
80: 271,322/ 152,005
81: 181,552/ 126,139
82: 130,418/*189,747
83: 120,873/ 154,318
84: 135,678/ 261,591
85: 156,514/ 180,018
86: 224,410/ 192,219
87: 159,145/ 137,760
88: 211,225/ 96,275
89: 209,769/ 110,850
90: 128,189/ 35,048
91: 98,737/ 101,316
92: 79,280/ 70,712
93: 114,228/ *39,755
94:*123,198/ 119,934
95: 185,986/ 122,844
96: 126,483/ 66,827
97: 100,254/ 95,812
98: 170,642/ 77,198
99: 126,067/ 42,098
00: 218,525/ 45,417
01: 155,162/ 29,009
(01 production stopped May 2001. 2002 had a lengthy run))
02: (not yet released)
Total 1965-2001: 7,899,556/ 4,821,768
From here.
http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/show...uction+figures
#371
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So yes, while the numbers in my memory were a little off, the point still stands. Ford didn't have a financial need to make the Mustang more competitive. Would have been nice, but nice doesn't sell cars or make money.
Edit: Between '95-'01 the Mustang sold a little over 1.2 million, while the Firebird/Camaro combined were a little over 800,000.
Edit: Between '95-'01 the Mustang sold a little over 1.2 million, while the Firebird/Camaro combined were a little over 800,000.
Last edited by Irunelevens; 01-22-2014 at 02:02 AM.
#372
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (55)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The mustang obviously was under power during the 90s and early 2000s and yet it was still being sold. That being said could Ford have made more power for it yes but at what cost? I know if i was selling a product that was underperforming but still making bank why spend millions if not billions redesigning it when They where clearly making Millions if not Billions off of it. Also i just can't figure out if another car is around the same price but is faster why not buy it? Besides being brand loyal i couldn't see why not. Either way this war will never end and it makes for better performance options for us. Thank you Ford for forcing GM/Chevy to redue the 5th gen ![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
So yes, while the numbers in my memory were a little off, the point still stands. Ford didn't have a financial need to make the Mustang more competitive. Would have been nice, but nice doesn't sell cars or make money.
Edit: Between '95-'01 the Mustang sold a little over 1.2 million, while the Firebird/Camaro combined were a little over 800,000.
Edit: Between '95-'01 the Mustang sold a little over 1.2 million, while the Firebird/Camaro combined were a little over 800,000.
#373
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Well appearantly furd thought there was a reason to upgrade after the *** whopping the the took when the Camaro returned...........so yea......it was a good point. If it wasn't for that you furd guys would probably still be having to buy a pos 3v.
#374
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The mustang obviously was under power during the 90s and early 2000s and yet it was still being sold. That being said could Ford have made more power for it yes but at what cost? I know if i was selling a product that was underperforming but still making bank why spend millions if not billions redesigning it when They where clearly making Millions if not Billions off of it. Also i just can't figure out if another car is around the same price but is faster why not buy it? Besides being brand loyal i couldn't see why not. Either way this war will never end and it makes for better performance options for us. Thank you Ford for forcing GM/Chevy to redue the 5th gen ![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
I still think from 98 to 02 GM didn't advertise/promote the car enough. You barely saw any ads for it or even commercials. Most average people had no idea of the incredible performance that car had against others of the time. Hell after 99 you never saw any road tests of that car at all. Most LS21 people didn't even realize the 01 and up cars offered more power. Plus they were all unrated by about 40HP at the crank. People simply thought it was an old design still around....
#375
Teching In
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Edit: notice I did not say MACH1s because we get beat by everything. LOL...jk
#377
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Regardless they shoulda had something better than a 3v. There was no reason a n/a 4v could not have been optional. Although marginally better than a 3v it would have showed they were trying.
#380
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I still think from 98 to 02 GM didn't advertise/promote the car enough. You barely saw any ads for it or even commercials. Most average people had no idea of the incredible performance that car had against others of the time. Hell after 99 you never saw any road tests of that car at all. Most LS21 people didn't even realize the 01 and up cars offered more power. Plus they were all unrated by about 40HP at the crank. People simply thought it was an old design still around....
![Icon Lol](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/icon_lol.gif)