• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-

145 top speed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mafia Mustang
  • Start date Start date Jul 10, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next
First Prev 4 of 5 Next Last

87Mustang351

Member
Sep 12, 2005
220
1
16
Canada, Nova scotia, Cape Breton
Jul 14, 2007
#61
  • Jul 14, 2007
  • #61
with my 4:10 i've done 220 KPH and had about 500 RPMS left before rev limiter on my tach, didnt feel like pushing it much further...that was with a 4 cylender transmission, not sure if that matters or not
 
C

curt2969

New Member
Aug 25, 2004
0
0
0
Jul 31, 2007
#62
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #62
160 visitor

I have had mine to over 160 several times, but I have a TKO 600 and 392 RWHP. I think I can do 170. But the aerodynamics of the car are scary enough at that speed as it is. I have all the safety gear installed, and still get VERY nervous. I am curious as to what the aerodynamic top speed of the car actually is. Anyone know? Has an unmodified (aerodynamically) fox been to 200? LET ME KNOW!!!
Curt
 

bloopbloob

Member
Sep 27, 2006
578
4
16
Alberta
Jul 31, 2007
#63
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #63
i dont know why i've spent so much time reading this thread, since i dont really know what 140 mph (or any mph) is to me.... but i've gone about 230km/h a couple times .... whats that in mph??? thats just of the stock speedo, 2:73's and 245/45/17's, well over a year ago in nearly stock form....
anyone know what 272 km/h is? i remember seeing that on my old bike once... and only once, never again.
 

88mouse

New Member
Apr 18, 2007
630
0
0
Mooresville nc
Jul 31, 2007
#64
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #64
Mustang5L5 said:
Best way to confirm ACTUAL top speed is go have it radar verified.

So go out there, find a cop and fly by him. Then scan the ticket and there is the proof!
Click to expand...

 

Mustank

Founding Member
Sep 11, 2001
166
1
18
Germany
Jul 31, 2007
#65
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #65
bloopbloob said:
i dont know why i've spent so much time reading this thread, since i dont really know what 140 mph (or any mph) is to me.... but i've gone about 230km/h a couple times .... whats that in mph??? thats just of the stock speedo, 2:73's and 245/45/17's, well over a year ago in nearly stock form....
anyone know what 272 km/h is? i remember seeing that on my old bike once... and only once, never again.
Click to expand...


230 kph is about 140 mph. 272 kph is around 170.
 

RsStanG1987

I shaved all my pubes playing this game.
10 Year Member
Mar 13, 2004
569
9
79
Dupont PA
Jul 31, 2007
#66
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #66
bloopbloob said:
i dont know why i've spent so much time reading this thread, since i dont really know what 140 mph (or any mph) is to me.... but i've gone about 230km/h a couple times .... whats that in mph??? thats just of the stock speedo, 2:73's and 245/45/17's, well over a year ago in nearly stock form....
anyone know what 272 km/h is? i remember seeing that on my old bike once... and only once, never again.
Click to expand...

And you have 17" tires so that makes your speedo off and read faster..
 

millhouse

Founding Member
May 14, 2002
1,985
0
46
Simpsonville, SC
Jul 31, 2007
#67
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #67
RsStanG1987 said:
And you have 17" tires so that makes your speedo off and read faster..
Click to expand...

Actually, his combo (245 45 17) is still a 26" rim/tire setup…so the speedo will read fine (relatively speaking of course).
 

RsStanG1987

I shaved all my pubes playing this game.
10 Year Member
Mar 13, 2004
569
9
79
Dupont PA
Jul 31, 2007
#68
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #68
millhouse said:
Actually, his combo (245 45 17) is still a 26" rim/tire setup…so the speedo will read fine (relatively speaking of course).
Click to expand...

Yes but most speedometers read wrong in stock form on theese cars.. So al ot of theese astronomical speeds people are posting are false..
 

millhouse

Founding Member
May 14, 2002
1,985
0
46
Simpsonville, SC
Jul 31, 2007
#69
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #69
RsStanG1987 said:
Yes but most speedometers read wrong in stock form on theese cars.. So al ot of theese astronomical speeds people are posting are false..
Click to expand...

No argument with you there.
 

ninety15.0

New Member
Mar 10, 2004
1,336
0
0
Jul 31, 2007
#70
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #70
Yea im not sure if i believe all the guys saying that they have been 160+. Thats very fast and i would like the know the instrumentation used during those runs. Stock instruments dont count. The only figures i would believe are from autometer gauges or satellite GPS. At 5000 rpm my stock tach is off by almost 500 rpm...according to the autometer!
 

TRWXXA

Member
Jan 18, 2003
190
1
19
RIGHT BEHIND YOU!!!... Made you look.
Jul 31, 2007
#71
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #71
bloopbloob said:
i've gone about 230km/h a couple times .... whats that in mph??? anyone know what 272 km/h is? i remember seeing that on my old bike once... and only once, never again.
Click to expand...
To be precise...

230 kph = 142 mph

272 kph = 169 mph


RsStanG1987 said:
Yes but most speedometers read wrong in stock form on theese cars.. So al ot of theese astronomical speeds people are posting are false..
Click to expand...
Speedometers can read as much as 10% too high from the factory (they're not supposed to read low at all). That means at a true speed of 145mph, the speedometer could be showing 160 mph.
 

GT350R

Member
Oct 5, 2000
723
0
17
Cleveland
Jul 31, 2007
#72
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #72
Stock SVO FTW!!!!!

The 84 SVO my buddy is selling ran the Silver State Classic. The easiest year to verify what it did is 1994 , becuse it was in Muscle Mustang &FF magazine.

100 mile course. Start from a stop , and slow for turns. It AVERAGED 138mph.

Car was dead stock with just safety equiptment added.

The car actually "broke out" as it was in a 130mph class. So no telling how fast it could have gone. Its also an 84 which had the lowest hp rating.

How many cars from the 80's will HOLD 140 mph for 100 miles?
 

Nibbie

New Member
Mar 10, 2007
127
0
0
Jul 31, 2007
#73
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #73
I wonder how fast I could go I dont think no that fast, well maybe in 4th but my 5th gear is to low and i think I might run out of gear at like 130 , I forget what a regular t-5 5th gear gear ratio is but myt-5 has a differnt one. To mo overdrive is somtimes usless on the highway if im going like 85 because my rpm is at like 2000 or 2500-ish
 

WHITE94COBRA

New Member
Nov 14, 2003
816
0
0
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Jul 31, 2007
#74
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #74
On a stock car the computer speed limits it to 149mph, then you start to feel the govenor kick in, it makes the car feel like it's running out of gas then comming back to life. If you tune out the govenor the top speed I have seen on a stock fox was 155. If the car was more aerodynamic it would eclipse this in stock form, but it's a brick at that speed, so you will need more power to get past that.
Now if you want to see something fun, do a high speed blast on a dyno after cancelling the govenor, and watch it climb to well over 170 - 180.
 

millhouse

Founding Member
May 14, 2002
1,985
0
46
Simpsonville, SC
Jul 31, 2007
#75
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #75
WHITE94COBRA said:
On a stock car the computer speed limits it to 149mph, then you start to feel the govenor kick in, it makes the car feel like it's running out of gas then comming back to life. If you tune out the govenor the top speed I have seen on a stock fox was 155. If the car was more aerodynamic it would eclipse this in stock form, but it's a brick at that speed, so you will need more power to get past that.
Now if you want to see something fun, do a high speed blast on a dyno after cancelling the govenor, and watch it climb to well over 170 - 180.
Click to expand...


The stock foxbody computer had no such function that limit's the speed. There is some coding built in...but none is activated to actually effect top speed.

None the less, a stock foxbody will not do 155MPH regardless. It simply does not have the power to do so. 155 would require bouncing off the rev limiter with 3.08 gears in 4th. I'm sorry, it's just not going to happen.
 

WHITE94COBRA

New Member
Nov 14, 2003
816
0
0
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Jul 31, 2007
#76
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #76
I have never owned a fox, however my buddy Steve has owned 4, 2 Gt's and 2 93 cobra's. I know my computer didnt let my 95 Gt or my 94 cobra go past 145 (my 95 wouldnt even come close to 140), and his car would hit 149, and do exactly what I had said. Now after his tune he would hit 155, his only mods were exhaust and filter change. Now between exhaust (cat back) and a K&N filter (Drop in) he is still only adding a handfull of power, (I would be shocked if it equated to 10 RWHP), And a tune adding a little timing. So in my opinion it's still basically stock.
Anyway long story short, in his car going to vegas it would sit at the 149 mark and shut down then come back to life then shut down so on and so forth. This was in 5th gear and not very high in the rpm's, I do not know how accurate your speedo's are, but thats all I had to work with. I know for a fact that my 94's speedo is accurate until 80 where it starts to show low.

All 3 of us Me, Steve, and Steve (tuner) agreed it is a waste of money to tune his car with so little done. This was just an FYI.


millhouse said:
The stock foxbody computer had no such function that limit's the speed. There is some coding built in...but none is activated to actually effect top speed.

None the less, a stock foxbody will not do 155MPH regardless. It simply does not have the power to do so. 155 would require bouncing off the rev limiter with 3.08 gears in 4th. I'm sorry, it's just not going to happen.
Click to expand...
 

Nibbie

New Member
Mar 10, 2007
127
0
0
Jul 31, 2007
#77
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #77
I dont think a 94 or 95 is classified as a foxbody. I dont know but the ford eec computer might be differnt from a 93 and under to a 94 and up. I dont think fox body's had anytype of governer on them. somebody please correct me if im wrong.
 

WHITE94COBRA

New Member
Nov 14, 2003
816
0
0
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Jul 31, 2007
#78
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #78
As I specified in the above post, I have never owned a fox. I know the computer programming is very different for both years, but the fact I am trying to get across was what my friends car did at that speed.
The 94- 95 computers have weak programming, thats why they dont take to mods as well without tuning, the fox computer however stock for stock takes to mods much better. Look at how high a stock fox timing can go without pinging, my 95 Gt I got pinging with anything above 10* my buddy Steves car ran the best at 14*. The cobra's computer has a better tune, but still not that great. The 94 - 95 comp's come with the t4mo tune, where as the cobra has j4j1 tune, it's all in the fuel and timing tables. Anyway sorry for getting off topic, I am just stating what I have witnessed.

Nibbie said:
I dont think a 94 or 95 is classified as a foxbody. I dont know but the ford eec computer might be differnt from a 93 and under to a 94 and up. I dont think fox body's had anytype of governer on them. somebody please correct me if im wrong.
Click to expand...
 

millhouse

Founding Member
May 14, 2002
1,985
0
46
Simpsonville, SC
Jul 31, 2007
#79
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #79
WHITE94COBRA said:
As I specified in the above post, I have never owned a fox. I know the computer programming is very different for both years, but the fact I am trying to get across was what my friends car did at that speed.
The 94- 95 computers have weak programming, thats why they dont take to mods as well without tuning, the fox computer however stock for stock takes to mods much better. Look at how high a stock fox timing can go without pinging, my 95 Gt I got pinging with anything above 10* my buddy Steves car ran the best at 14*. The cobra's computer has a better tune, but still not that great. The 94 - 95 comp's come with the t4mo tune, where as the cobra has j4j1 tune, it's all in the fuel and timing tables. Anyway sorry for getting off topic, I am just stating what I have witnessed.
Click to expand...

That's cool...but just because the speedo said 155 does not make it true. With stock gearing, max speed is in 4th gear at max rpm...which is drag limited. Overdrive is far much for the stock 5.0 to handle...and as such it will ultimately slow you down. I'd venture to say the speedo indicated 155 you witnessed was probably closer to 135-140.

FYI, I do believe 94 & 95 gt's did not have a top speed governer while the cobra's did.
 

90

Active Member
Sep 24, 2006
0
1
43
Michigan insane asylum
Jul 31, 2007
#80
  • Jul 31, 2007
  • #80
the Guy Who Just Fixed my Clutch, His Mustang Does 185 in the quarter Mile... So im going to lean On False..
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next
First Prev 4 of 5 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T5 5th gear 89 gt
  • mac_55
  • Mar 19, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
202
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 20, 2026
Mustang5L5
Drivetrain 5th Gear Ratio
  • PonyGTrider
  • Dec 8, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Dec 31, 2025
Qtrhrse23
Q
T
Fox Convertible top issues
  • TDM389
  • Feb 15, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
5
Views
321
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 15, 2026
General karthief
T5 identification
  • 3054tony
  • May 16, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
25
Views
475
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 20, 2026
AeroCoupe
T
Newbie looking for some info on speedo gears
  • TDM389
  • Nov 15, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
247
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 16, 2025
TDM389
T
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?