1989 Motor Trend shootout
- Thread starter ill advised
- Start date
Wow only 15.38 for the LX? That's a bunch of complete BS. I've ran 14.80s on bone stock 5.0s with street tread. Those mag guys don't know how to drive.
Also it's a good thing the GNX isn't on that list
Also it's a good thing the GNX isn't on that list
Wow only 15.38 for the LX? That's a bunch of complete BS. I've ran 14.80s on bone stock 5.0s with street tread. Those mag guys don't know how to drive.
Also it's a good thing the GNX isn't on that list
#1 That's what they did!
#2 1987 was the first & last year for the GNX
#3 Turbo TA owned 1989!!!!
Correct me if i'm wrong but wasn't the Turbo T/A more or less a GNX with a Firebird wrapper?
Also you're out of your mind if you think the best a stock 5.0 can run is 15.38. I've personally driven a stock VERT to 14.90s.
Mr. Rustypwnz
Advanced Member
Right, but the GN/GNX were Regals with more or less the same engine. I believe the GNX just had a racier suspension but i'm not totally sure there.
Mr. Rustypwnz
Advanced Member
gnx had more boost, as well, some different gauges (boost gauge was mechanical instead of digital bar graph) and I do belive the suspension was revised slightly, maybe a different turbo?
Ill have to call my uncle, as he is an expert on these..
edit: dammit extrpr50 beat me to it...
Ill have to call my uncle, as he is an expert on these..
edit: dammit extrpr50 beat me to it...
wow, the 5.0 is only 3022 lbs. I heard around 3000 lbs but was not sure how true it is. Now i look at newer vehicles and just see a bunch of fatty's. I dont get how they try and make a better and faster car when the weight just keeps going up with every new modle that comes along. 
Mr. Rustypwnz
Advanced Member
get in a wreck with a fox, and youll wish you had that extra weight, weight comes with a solid car, not saying that you cannot make them solid, but new standards they have to meet is killing performance in all the newer cars, for instance the turd known as the charger...
lol Yep. They couldn't get it to hook either, which is also true to form.Why doesn't it surprise me the Fox was last in braking
Real world weight is in the 3150 lb range, without driver. My LX Hatch was 3160 lbs.
Newer cars handle better, are faster in a straight line, more efficient, get better gas mileage, ride better, brake better, safer, etc.
With these improvements, you are going to get some weight increases.
Well worth it to me...
25thmustang
Mustang Master
If you read the article you will see the Mustang was only a middle of the road performer, it just happened to be cheap. Had that been an $18K GT with an auto, it would have finished middle of the road at best.
Ok I will correct you because you ARE wrong. A GNX was a Buick Regal. Road like chit, handled like chit, and couldn't brake to save it's life.
The TA handled like a dream, & braked fairly well for the day. Did it share the same engine? Yup!
So do A LOT of cars!
And Ive seen stock AOD's pull low 15's in the 1/4. So don't act like it's something totally out of the ordinary
Holy crap! An IROC-Z was $19K in 1989!!
Why doesn't it surprise me the Fox was last in braking
And every ginso in NY/NJ owned one!
Similar threads
