m396 #00-011 Posted August 5, 2004 Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 Your telling me his best time was a 14.3 and he had a pro-charger on a 5.0? I doubt you beat a procharged stang with a stock ss, over and over like that...maybe a stock 5.0 vs. a stock SS would be more believable?jk Guys, this is an older 5.0. It can't compete currently stock for stock. Put the Procharger on it, pushing 5-6 psi. Still, without traction and driver skills, it's not that fast. I believe it, 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurbochargedBerserker Posted August 5, 2004 Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 Your telling me his best time was a 14.3 and he had a pro-charger on a 5.0? I doubt you beat a procharged stang with a stock ss, over and over like that...maybe a stock 5.0 vs. a stock SS would be more believable?jk Guys, this is an older 5.0. It can't compete currently stock for stock. Put the Procharger on it, pushing 5-6 psi. Still, without traction and driver skills, it's not that fast. I believe it, 100% Some of the older GT 5.0s ran 14.2s bone stock, the LX's were about 1-2/10s faster. That is not a GT from the looks of it (looks like an LX with some body fx). My 92 GT ran 14.8 in stock trim. With heads, cam, 24lb injectors, ram air, custom tune, offroad H-pipe, walker-dynomax catback, headers, cobra intake and plenum spacer, 3.55 gears, BFG drag radials, subframe connectors, pulleys, built tranny, and big clutch ran 13.2s consistently and a best of 12.86 at sea level. It was set up for corner carving as well. The only time I ever hit 15s was the first run after the heads and the cam... It was 102 degrees, the track was hot as hell, and I wagged the tail when I hit second gear. My buddy with a procharger ate my lunch every single time. ATI built their business on 5.0 mustangs. They didn't do that by making 5.0s run slower than stock If it has a procharger, it is short a couple of cylinders (maybe 4), or it has an automatic with the worst tune ever . BTW that looks like an 88-89. It looses some go for the droptop, but 86,87,88s were the 14.2 years for the 5.0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiel Posted August 5, 2004 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 The numbers are on the website oslracing.com My startnumber is 30 and as you can see on the window the stang had 220. pics of me with the Vortech-set is on photobucket now if i only had time to put it on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superman Posted August 5, 2004 Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 Your telling me his best time was a 14.3 and he had a pro-charger on a 5.0? I doubt you beat a procharged stang with a stock ss, over and over like that...maybe a stock 5.0 vs. a stock SS would be more believable?jk Guys, this is an older 5.0. It can't compete currently stock for stock. Put the Procharger on it, pushing 5-6 psi. Still, without traction and driver skills, it's not that fast. I believe it, 100% my brother has a 1990 mustang with full exhaust and air intake with 160,000miles and he was right beside me with no nitrous. its simple . there is NOWAY a stock SS can out run a mustang with a procharger. he could have choked off and restarted and still beat a stock SS in the 1/4 mile! ! ! Maybe that guys got a 10year old daughter that was driving the car then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m396 #00-011 Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 Let me back track a bit. I'm thinking of myself, and not his particular truck. In crappy weather, I run 14.4-14.5. I can eat a LT-1 Trans Am (Faster than any stock 5.0) from a dig. Past the 660', we even up, well after I've put lengths on them because of traction issues. His stock SS w/ larger rims is a little harder to believe, true. OK, he posted he ran faster than a Procharged 5.0. Big deal. We know nothing of the car, or real engine mods. For all we know it could be a non-stalled Auto, DropTop, worn street tires, crappy tuned, boost leaking, 200k mile'd 5.0 Who are we to doubt him, he's posted slips and all. Bottom line is, he beat it, get over it BTW, I beat two of three STS trucks in KS w/ my lil' NA SS. Believe it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krambo Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 I also own a 91 LX. Bone stock...14.5,...lightly modded (gears, exhaust, pulleys) high 13's, Paxton @ 8psi 12's no problem. I am willing to bet that car has a 3.08 or worse rear. The drop tops were famous for being heavy and having a numerically lower rear...for crusing. Nice KILL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurbochargedBerserker Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 I don't think anyone is doubting Chiel. I think everyone is doubting the mustang owner... Who was the third STS truck in KS? Oh.. Dave's Tacoma? I run 14.4-14.5. I can eat a LT-1 Trans Am (Faster than any stock 5.0) from a dig. LT-1s must not be faster than most stock 5.0s then... Take a read of the LX times listed here. My bud's 86 5.0 runs 14.2 stock ... to this day. BTW, none of the stock mustang times listed here are as high as the best runs of the "procharged" mustang... that says something all by itself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 the 3 sts trucks there if i recall correctly were: ssblackss, mustbebrent, and i forget the other guys name, but he is the sts dealer that brought his sts equipped c3 (6.0 awd like the SS). if you notice after kansas they weren't firing off any times. matt's naturally asperated 14.2 i believe was only beaten once by an sts truck and that was brents last pass. a pass he later beat that time with only first and second gear on the nitrous. jason's truck held it's own very well against the turbo trucks with very few mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurbochargedBerserker Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 Ah -- Dave was the STS guy there -- He said Allen tuned his stock truck in KS, but fogot to tell me it was a C3!! I guess the tacoma is his "old truck". I know he has the stock fuel system. Did he have anything else but the turbo? Now I gotta give him a hard time about having a "low mod quotient". I'd expect Jason's truck to do well -- if for no other reason, it sleeps next to that Mallet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m396 #00-011 Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 I just re-read my own post. It's been a long day. I appologize if I happened to offend anyone. My point was, many unknown factors will play into a given 1320' timeslip. and, hopefully, this isn't the best slip this SC 5.0 has dished out. There are good days at the track, and there are bad. But as we know, tires, gearing, weather, track prep, driver skill, etc. all play major factors in the final time slip. Heck, I never thought my truck would have a been able to hold it's own against the STS's in KS. But high temps and humidity favor a N/A set-up over FI. If I had just posted about how my N/A SS beat a STS SS, similar replies to this thread would have followed. Needless to say, all of these trucks have more in them when the moons are aligned. to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurbochargedBerserker Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 None taken here, Jason. A little friendly debate is good for the pancreas. Or something squishy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted August 6, 2004 Report Share Posted August 6, 2004 Ah -- Dave was the STS guy there -- He said Allen tuned his stock truck in KS, but fogot to tell me it was a C3!! I guess the tacoma is his "old truck". I know he has the stock fuel system. Did he have anything else but the turbo? Now I gotta give him a hard time about having a "low mod quotient". I'd expect Jason's truck to do well -- if for no other reason, it sleeps next to that Mallet... and that is one damn cool corvette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G Posted August 7, 2004 Report Share Posted August 7, 2004 Guys, this is an older 5.0. It can't compete currently stock for stock. Put the Procharger on it, pushing 5-6 psi. Still, without traction and driver skills, it's not that fast. I believe it, 100% What exactly are you implying by stating that it is an older 5.0? If I must assume, I would think you are either saying that age and mileage has caught up to the Mustang or that 5L's were just slow. It really isn't wise to underestimate a 5L. In the right hands even in stock form, they can be ruin the days of many vehicles including the Silverado SS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.