• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

3000GT vs. 95 GT

  • Thread starter Thread starter burtieburns
  • Start date Start date Apr 7, 2004
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last
S

sc302

New Member
Oct 15, 2003
178
0
0
Apr 7, 2004
#21
  • Apr 7, 2004
  • #21
Dave95GT said:
3KGT VR4's arent that fast. They weigh close to 4000lbs and run a low 14 stock
Click to expand...
A good driver can get them in the low 13's, some small mods 12's. but no they aren't that fast they will just smoke a stock 94/95 mustang, not to mention that he can take off like no tomorrow with the awd, rev it up dump the clutch you may hear a chirp then all of his wheels will grip and take off, unless you know what you are doing he will take off like a bat out of hell
 

Rootus

Officially Addicted
Feb 8, 2003
6,659
1
0
Portland, Oregon
Apr 7, 2004
#22
  • Apr 7, 2004
  • #22
sc302 said:
A good driver can get them in the low 13's, some small mods 12's.
Click to expand...
Must be one damn good driver. VR4 puts what, 225 to the wheels? Most '03 Cobras take good driving to hit the 12's consistently, and they're putting down about 365 to the wheels. And the VR4 may actually weigh *more* than the Cobra...
 

GTJake

Founding Member
Oct 28, 2002
3,049
0
56
Ann Arbor, MI
Apr 7, 2004
#23
  • Apr 7, 2004
  • #23
He's prolly talkin about a 1000' track...

Jake
 

btracer02

Member
Dec 25, 2003
146
0
16
coatesville, PA
Apr 7, 2004
#24
  • Apr 7, 2004
  • #24
my friend has a stock 94 vr4 and ran a 13.4 with a 1.78 60ft, they definately arent slow
 
P

ponypowa

New Member
Oct 14, 2003
43
0
0
Apr 7, 2004
#25
  • Apr 7, 2004
  • #25
http://dynamicracing.com/customer/product.php?productid=68&cat=49&page=1


I thought that was a pretty cool kit for vr-4
 

cb18201

New Member
Oct 25, 2003
1,140
0
0
CT
Apr 7, 2004
#26
  • Apr 7, 2004
  • #26
ponypowa said:
http://dynamicracing.com/customer/product.php?productid=68&cat=49&page=1


I thought that was a pretty cool kit for vr-4
Click to expand...


Warning: The following upgrades have been known to promote speeds in excess of 200 mph. If you are unsure of your ability to resist this particular illegal activity, you may want to re-evaluate your decision.

why dont any parts we buy have a warning like this lol
 

OrangeMustangGt

Founding Member
Mar 7, 2002
1,976
0
36
Cape Cod, MA
Apr 8, 2004
#27
  • Apr 8, 2004
  • #27
you guys are think incorrect: here is the deal with 3000 gt's. There is 3 models, almost like the mustang. You have the 3000gt(base) the 3000 gt SL, and the 3000 gt vr4. The first 2 have a N/a 6 cyl engine rated at 222 horsepower. The autos are SOOO slow, and the five speeds are not much faster. All the sl model is is basicall looks, chrome rims, etc. Now, the vr4, That car has a 6 speed, AWD, and twin turbo. It Puts out something close to 400 hp i believe. That model has all sorts of goodies, 4 wheel steering, electric exhaust cutouts, electrically movable front and rear spoilers, however, all of em are real pigs, heavy. The vr4 being very because of the awd system. However, watch out it is fast.
 
T

toppdogg_1

Founding Member
Nov 27, 2001
89
0
0
Apr 8, 2004
#28
  • Apr 8, 2004
  • #28
GreenMustangGt said:
That car has a 6 speed, AWD, and twin turbo. It Puts out something close to 400 hp i believe. That model has all sorts of goodies, 4 wheel steering, electric exhaust cutouts, electrically movable front and rear spoilers, however, all of em are real pigs, heavy. The vr4 being very because of the awd system. However, watch out it is fast.
Click to expand...

300hp for the 91-93 and 320hp for the 94+
in about 97 (i think) they got rid of the active aero spoiler's and the car was lightened up a bit. Stock they are a high 13 second car (with a good driver) and can be put in 12's with basic BPU mods.
 
J

Jordan_J

New Member
Nov 8, 2003
18
0
1
IN
Apr 8, 2004
#29
  • Apr 8, 2004
  • #29
I believe that even with his lack of skill he will take you, they are really fast cars. But you have a lot better of a chance goin from a dig than from a roll because they are geared lower because they aren't made for drag racing, that's why they top out at 170+ mph.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Apr 8, 2004
#30
  • Apr 8, 2004
  • #30
so whens this race going to happen
 
S

sc302

New Member
Oct 15, 2003
178
0
0
Apr 8, 2004
#31
  • Apr 8, 2004
  • #31
HairyCanary said:
Must be one damn good driver. VR4 puts what, 225 to the wheels? Most '03 Cobras take good driving to hit the 12's consistently, and they're putting down about 365 to the wheels. And the VR4 may actually weigh *more* than the Cobra...
Click to expand...

That is some serious hp loss if they are loosing 90 hp to the wheels. Now to get this straight I was not referring to the crappy not worth more than my beat up old buick that can't do 15's with a F-16 Falcon strapped under it, I am talking about the All Wheel Drive, All Wheel Steering, some older ones have and Active Spoiler and Active Air Dam, 320hp VR4. (/IMO If you don't know anything about these cars you shouldn't talk, you may know about Mustangs and may beat the crap out of these cars but they are not slow and with a few mods can be just as fast as your modded Mustang or even faster; granted 40,000 for a 13 sec car was a bit expensive but what other cars had all of it's features, think about what our cars can do if they had all wheel steering and imagine taching our cars up to red line/dumping the clutch and getting no wheel spin not going sideways. if it's good enough for 10's it's good enough for the street (/IMO).

here is a site that says 13.9 in the 1/4
http://www.supercars.net/garages/imprezawrx14/38v2.html

here is another site for you
http://www.dragtimes.com/browse3.php?carmake=Mitsubishi&carmodel=3000GT

here is a page from car and driver that was scanned in although it's a mag from 93 you get the point
http://www.stealth316.com/images/cd_3-90-p5.jpg

But I have no clue what I am talking about......
 
S

SM-4

New Member
Aug 26, 2003
4
0
0
Apr 21, 2004
#32
  • Apr 21, 2004
  • #32
1st gen VR-4s have high 13/low 14sec capability
2nd gen VR-4s(94+) have mid 13sec capabilities stock

Not to be a mag racer but check the attachments. Non turbos weigh from 3100-3300lbs, turbos weigh around 37xx, the spyders are the ones that weigh 4000+lbs.
 

Attachments

  • sup2.webp
    21.3 KB · Views: 194
  • sup1.webp
    10.5 KB · Views: 199
R

Road_Runna

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 23, 2002
594
6
39
Ogden, UT
Apr 22, 2004
#33
  • Apr 22, 2004
  • #33
the vr4's are rated at 320 hp (not at the wheels)

AWD makes the cars heavier, simple enough. But when you have some kinda boost it really doesn't matter, your engine better be putting 320 to the wheels, in order to beat it.

I'de rather take a Dodge stealth instead of a 3000 VR4, they both have the same engine, but I think the stealth doesn't have all the weight added that the 3000 gt has.
 

mr_woodster

Active Member
Jul 28, 2003
1,314
0
36
Riverside, CA
Apr 22, 2004
#34
  • Apr 22, 2004
  • #34
Spendy is not the word for that car...or that kit.
 

White95V6

New Member
Dec 21, 2002
215
0
0
Hackettstown, NJ
Apr 22, 2004
#35
  • Apr 22, 2004
  • #35
My friend has one, the respond well to little mods, like a intake. We can launch it from 5000rpm, and its gone, it doesnt even break the tires, the thing is fast.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Apr 22, 2004
#36
  • Apr 22, 2004
  • #36
Striped5.0 said:
so whens this race going to happen
Click to expand...

I hate it when people come here and say can I beat ( insert car here ) in a race and then never come back to tell us what happed. 1. they get there ass handed to them and cant bear the embarrasment of telling us or 2. the race never happned for what ever reason. Just think it sucks when we offer our advise to help someone out and they never tell us what the outcome was. Sorry for the rant.
 
9

93civ

New Member
Feb 24, 2004
26
0
0
twin cities, MN
Apr 22, 2004
#37
  • Apr 22, 2004
  • #37
ok u hear alot of info about the vr4 and most of it is correct.

i was a HUGE fan of those cars and researched the HELL outta them. i looked into everything about those cars.

91-93 vr4 300 hp 5spd AWD with active aero spoiler(front and rear) the car ran a 13.9 best STOCK. most drivers hit around 14.2-14.5 with them.

94-95 vr4 300hp AWD 5spd, looks changed, no pop up lights. car still had front and rear active aero.

96-99 vr4 320hp(conservative figure) AWD 6spd, no longer had active aero but was quicker and could run 13.7 best in the 1/4 mile.

those cars also had sport electronic controlled suspension which would ajust automatically between sport and regular settings....

as for the AWD its not the best for dragging... rwd is the best and a good driver on a rwd car will win off the line everytime if the cars have similar power.... the vr4's can be quick and with just exhaust, intake, and downpipe those things can hit low 13's. put a boost controller on it and those things hauled. only problem is they were built like junk. altho the stealth is a worse car... true the engines are the same but the tranny was horrible.

in this race i have to give the nod EASILY to the vr4 IF the kid is a good driver.
 

White95V6

New Member
Dec 21, 2002
215
0
0
Hackettstown, NJ
Apr 22, 2004
#38
  • Apr 22, 2004
  • #38
Well my friends Vr4 has a Stillen Air Intake system, and the rest is stock. 120,000 miles, he beat a 1997 Z28 with Magnaflow Exhaust 4,10's and SLP Intake. They are fast cars for there weight.
 

302fordracer

New Member
Mar 27, 2004
738
0
0
Vancouver, WA
Apr 23, 2004
#39
  • Apr 23, 2004
  • #39
White95V6 said:
Well my friends Vr4 has a Stillen Air Intake system, and the rest is stock. 120,000 miles, he beat a 1997 Z28 with Magnaflow Exhaust 4,10's and SLP Intake. They are fast cars for there weight.
Click to expand...

that camaro driver must've sucked...I know vr4s fly but my family has had a few camaros I have driven them...suckers are like space craft especially with those mods even though they will simple ones.
 
S

SM-4

New Member
Aug 26, 2003
4
0
0
Apr 23, 2004
#40
  • Apr 23, 2004
  • #40
93civ said:
ok u hear alot of info about the vr4 and most of it is correct.

i was a HUGE fan of those cars and researched the HELL outta them. i looked into everything about those cars.

91-93 vr4 300 hp 5spd AWD with active aero spoiler(front and rear) the car ran a 13.9 best STOCK. most drivers hit around 14.2-14.5 with them.

94-95 vr4 300hp AWD 5spd, looks changed, no pop up lights. car still had front and rear active aero.

96-99 vr4 320hp(conservative figure) AWD 6spd, no longer had active aero but was quicker and could run 13.7 best in the 1/4 mile.

those cars also had sport electronic controlled suspension which would ajust automatically between sport and regular settings....

as for the AWD its not the best for dragging... rwd is the best and a good driver on a rwd car will win off the line everytime if the cars have similar power.... the vr4's can be quick and with just exhaust, intake, and downpipe those things can hit low 13's. put a boost controller on it and those things hauled. only problem is they were built like junk. altho the stealth is a worse car... true the engines are the same but the tranny was horrible.

in this race i have to give the nod EASILY to the vr4 IF the kid is a good driver.
Click to expand...

Obviously you didnt reasearch anything since 94-95 cars had 320hp stock, have a best "mag" time of 13.44, and the stealth is the EXACT same car mechanically and 90% cosmetically. AWD is awesome for street performance. You can cut 1.7 60's stock on normal street tires on the track or on the street. Obviously RWD is the best for track dragging when setup properly. Name a stronger stock awd tranny? And the interior/build quality is better than any mustang ever made. No flame just sharing information.

check out this article http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/auto3/9907AUCTBM.html
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 95 GT/Saleen Supercharged 331 install
  • from6to8
  • Mar 22, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
24
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
939
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
E
2007 GT Stalls when lights or a/c turned on
  • ejscarfo
  • Jun 22, 2026
  • 2005 - 2009 Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
186
2005 - 2009 Specific Tech Jun 29, 2026
ejscarfo
E
F
Fox 1990 Mustang GT 5.0 A9L – Engine suddenly shuts off but immediately restarts when key turned
  • FishermansFriend
  • Aug 9, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
349
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Yesterday at 12:24 AM
nickyb
95 GT Convertible fuel system
  • Performance_nube
  • Jun 28, 2024
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
9
Views
861
The Welcome Wagon Jun 29, 2024
Performance_nube
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
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?