LS1TECH - Camaro and Firebird Forum Discussion

LS1TECH - Camaro and Firebird Forum Discussion (https://ls1tech.com/forums/)
-   Street Racing & Kill Stories (https://ls1tech.com/forums/street-racing-kill-stories-36/)
-   -   mustang 5.0 (https://ls1tech.com/forums/street-racing-kill-stories/400038-mustang-5-0-a.html)

imnotplutonium 10-25-2005 11:14 AM

mustang 5.0
 
sorry no kill yet, this guy in my apt. complex drives a 5.0 mustang, that has like the 95 or 96 body style, the style with the 3 horizontal line brake lights right before they switched to the 3 vertical line brake lights. anyway, how much power are these things rated at? 305? i've been looking on the net but no luck.

wickedwarlock 10-25-2005 11:16 AM


Originally Posted by imnotplutonium
sorry no kill yet, this guy in my apt. complex drives a 5.0 mustang, that has like the 95 or 96 body style, the style with the 3 horizontal line brake lights right before they switched to the 3 vertical line brake lights. anyway, how much power are these things rated at? 305? i've been looking on the net but no luck.

I thought they were only 240 or later years 260. Some of these Ford guys will chime in shortly.

ZFan88 10-25-2005 11:26 AM

There were 240 at the crank. But better to mod IMO cuz of the 5.0 :)

DopdBrd 10-25-2005 12:06 PM

305??? UM NO!!! they were 240, when the older 5.0's (87-93) were actually faster with 225HP. The 94-95's I think were the bastard childen after the Fox and before the 4.6. They were heavier than the Foxes and had less power, not much but less. Even if it came down to modding it, you would be better off finding a cheaper Fox and modding it. From what I have seen, unless it is HEAVILY modded you should walk all over it.

BLKWS.6 10-25-2005 12:57 PM

it was a 95 if it was 5.0. if it was a 96 it was 4.6L and even slower. Stock 95 GT with a T5 should run 14.5-15.5 (most about 15.0ish)

imnotplutonium 10-25-2005 02:25 PM

ok yea 305 was way high, i was just estimating, giving ford a little credit... i guess too much. ok well i've been wanting to see if this guy wants to go but wasnt sure if i even had a chance, i've been told the 5.0's were badass, im guess just the foxbody

94burntorgTA 10-25-2005 02:43 PM

5.0 are bad ass my borther has one with full exaust and 3:90 gears and he beats my friend in his 95 formula and he as exaust to i like mustangs but i like my T/A better.

strokedmti422 10-25-2005 02:57 PM

maybe he was thinking of the 305ci engine, but even in that case its a 302... they are slow man, nothing to worry about short of a blower on buddys car.

Juiced 10-25-2005 03:23 PM

they might not be fast but they ET like crazy specially if he has any suspension mods. I've seen earlt 90 fox' cut 1.3 on DOT tires.

BLKWS.6 10-25-2005 04:59 PM

Most DOT DR fox's cut 1.6-1.9 unless VERY heavily modded in the hp department.

OverLord 10-25-2005 05:11 PM

the foxbodys setup for a blower like the 98-02s?

89tang 10-25-2005 05:15 PM

HP ratings for the mustang 87-2004

87 - 92 - 225hp
93 - 205hp (although still just as fast as the 87-92's the way the rated hp was different and to make the 94 look better since it was actually a drop in power)
94 - 97 - 215hp
98 - 225hp
99 - 2004 - 260hp

Overlord - the fox's can take some boost 87-92 forged internals 93's had hyper pistons still ok but they can't take to much detonation. Although the block can only handle about 450hp then after that it's a timebomb to when it's going to split, or throw all the interals all over the road.

BLKWS.6 10-25-2005 05:23 PM

a boosted fox with all stock internals etc. running 6psi will be about 300rwhp/330 rwtq

kazfan30 10-25-2005 05:24 PM


Originally Posted by 89tang
HP ratings for the mustang 87-2004

87 - 92 - 225hp
93 - 205hp (although still just as fast as the 87-92's the way the rated hp was different and to make the 94 look better since it was actually a drop in power)
94 - 97 - 215hp
98 - 225hp
99 - 2004 - 260hp

Overlord - the fox's can take some boost 87-92 forged internals 93's had hyper pistons still ok but they can't take to much detonation. Although the block can only handle about 450hp then after that it's a timebomb to when it's going to split, or throw all the interals all over the road.


BINGO....94-95 had a pitiful 215 flywheel hp...but....can easily be made into monsters......and by the way they have trouble getting out of the 15 sec et range with an AVERAGE driver...87-93's will take them stock :)

89tang 10-25-2005 05:26 PM


Originally Posted by kazfan30
BINGO....94-95 had a pitiful 215 flywheel hp...but....can easily be made into monsters......and by the way they have trouble getting out of the 15 sec et range with an AVERAGE driver...87-93's will take them stock :)

Yup i was at the track over the summer in my GTP there was a few 94-96 stangs there as i'm talking about trying to hit 13.6-13.7 in the prix their talking about hoping to hit a 15.0-15.3 LOL i was like jesus how pathetic those mustangs are. :jest: Oh and most never did hit their mark lol.

titanium barchetta 10-25-2005 07:31 PM


Originally Posted by imnotplutonium
this guy in my apt. complex drives a 5.0 mustang, that has like the 95 or 96 body style, the style with the 3 horizontal line brake lights right before they switched to the 3 vertical line brake lights. anyway, how much power are these things rated at? 305? i've been looking on the net but no luck.

Everyone knows that the 3 horizontal taillights, denotes the super duper extreme machine whammer slammer model, which sports 700rwhp! :eek2:

CrabhartLS1 10-25-2005 09:21 PM

arn't stock 5.0's rated at 215?

BLKWS.6 10-25-2005 09:34 PM

stock 5.0 was rated 225 87-92 and 205 in 93. The change betwwen 92 and 93 is minimal and the hp loss was tabulated as a whole from 88-93 in which ford made small revisions (cam profile etc.) which changed things model to model and they chose to only reflect it in the 93'. Also, a dyno of each year model would likely show negligable difference in the years. All dyno at around 190rwhp with a T5.

300bhp/ton 10-26-2005 05:59 AM


Originally Posted by imnotplutonium
ok yea 305 was way high, i was just estimating, giving ford a little credit... i guess too much. ok well i've been wanting to see if this guy wants to go but wasnt sure if i even had a chance, i've been told the 5.0's were badass, im guess just the foxbody

Just an FYI, all Mustangs except the latest are Foxes.

The 5.0's you are referring too are built on the Fox 3 platform, the later sn95 modles (95-04) are on the Fox 4 or 4th generation platform. The new 05 GT is not a Fox platform as it originated from Jaguar, but it's number is s197.

J E T 10-26-2005 10:15 AM

Stock for stock...

Mustang GT's: all bark, no bite
LT1/LS1 f-bodies: all bite, no bark (actually LT1's sound fuckin' nice stock)

By that I mean...Mustang GT's sound fast (all bark), but stock for stock they aren't nothing to brag about (no bite). LT1/LS1 f-bodies are quiet and don't sound fast (no bark), but stock for stock they would rape a Mustang GT (all bite) with an A4 or an M6.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 AM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands