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

5.0 vs LS1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gumby84
  • Start date Start date Jun 8, 2009
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prev
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Next
First Prev 6 of 10 Next Last

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Jun 19, 2009
#101
  • Jun 19, 2009
  • #101
and i thought this thread was supposed to be about comparing the LS1 to the 5.0

neither the cobra or mach 1 motor is either a LSx or a 5.0

 

95Vert383AOD

15 Year Member
Jun 10, 2008
1,133
34
69
New Bedford, MA
Jun 19, 2009
#102
  • Jun 19, 2009
  • #102
Gearbanger 101 said:
Mehh....400hp...900hp. What does it matter, they still all seem to run 12's when they get to the track.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah this thread is about who runs anyways 12's right?

Who needs torque? I hear from the import forums that if you need torque then your car is too heavy
 

1slow95

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
1,797
3
48
ohio
Jun 19, 2009
#103
  • Jun 19, 2009
  • #103
It would be nice if someone made a LS1 style heads/intake package for the 5.0. You can easily replace the distributor with a cam sensor and coil packs these days. That will probably be my next mod actually.

I found this new intake from Edelbrock, looks very interesting....

Edelbrock.com - EFI - EFI Manifolds - Ford
 
S

Stopsign32v

Member
May 18, 2008
394
0
16
Gville, SC
Jun 19, 2009
#104
  • Jun 19, 2009
  • #104
^ I cant imagine what size hood you would have to run to make that intake work. Looks more designed around the Cobra R intake. The key to making good power out of a 5.0/5.8 is to get rid of that traditional 180* bend intake. Well that is if you want to make power above 6,000rpms.
 

95Vert383AOD

15 Year Member
Jun 10, 2008
1,133
34
69
New Bedford, MA
Jun 19, 2009
#105
  • Jun 19, 2009
  • #105
Stopsign32v said:
^ I cant imagine what size hood you would have to run to make that intake work. Looks more designed around the Cobra R intake. The key to making good power out of a 5.0/5.8 is to get rid of that traditional 180* bend intake. Well that is if you want to make power above 6,000rpms.
Click to expand...

What about a 90mm TB and a 4" pipe? Would that make Power over 6000RPM ???

I feel you can either make the pipe straighter OR make the pipe bigger so the bend doesn't effect performance.
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,293
1,634
214
Acworth, GA
Jun 20, 2009
#106
  • Jun 20, 2009
  • #106
Low-5.0 said:
It would be nice if someone made a LS1 style heads/intake package for the 5.0. You can easily replace the distributor with a cam sensor and coil packs these days. That will probably be my next mod actually.

I found this new intake from Edelbrock, looks very interesting....

Edelbrock.com - EFI - EFI Manifolds - Ford
Click to expand...

Somebody already put LS1 heads on a 5.0. I saw pictures on the net of it awhile back. They modified a carbuerated Ford Intake to make it fit. I can't find any of the pics now, but if you do a search you'll find all the forums where people talked about it.

Kurt
 

HankyGT

Member
Jan 15, 2006
81
3
6
Warren, OH
Jun 24, 2009
#107
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #107
Stopsign,

How's that BoxR intake working out for you?
 
S

Stopsign32v

Member
May 18, 2008
394
0
16
Gville, SC
Jun 24, 2009
#108
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #108
It works great. The people that say the car has no low end torque don't know what they are talking about. I've got over 315rwtq by 3,000rpms.
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Jun 24, 2009
#109
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #109
Stopsign32v said:
It works great. The people that say the car has no low end torque don't know what they are talking about. I've got over 315rwtq by 3,000rpms.
Click to expand...

Just being DA.. but that's not much and those peeps like me want it well b4 3000. Flame suit on.
 
S

Stopsign32v

Member
May 18, 2008
394
0
16
Gville, SC
Jun 24, 2009
#110
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #110
I don't race anyone at 3,000rpms or below so I see no point in all that torque at 2,000rpms unless you plan to pull your mobile home with your car.
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Jun 24, 2009
#111
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #111
Stopsign32v said:
I don't race anyone at 3,000rpms or below so I see no point in all that torque at 2,000rpms unless you plan to pull your mobile home with your car.
Click to expand...

Mobile home pulls I leave to the chevy guys. But "waiting for my torque" is not for a streeter. Like I said, Chris's car will pull away from yours AND mine in top gear and from a light. You see, what I am trying to say is that your car would feel slow the way I drive. Two different mindsets, two different drives. It's all good.
 

95Vert383AOD

15 Year Member
Jun 10, 2008
1,133
34
69
New Bedford, MA
Jun 24, 2009
#112
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #112
Mmmmm TORQUE

Torque at low RPMs...why guys ditch 302's for 351's and 351's for 460's
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jun 24, 2009
#113
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #113
Indeed. If I wanted to start making power above 3,000RPM, I would have bought a Honda.
 

95Vert383AOD

15 Year Member
Jun 10, 2008
1,133
34
69
New Bedford, MA
Jun 24, 2009
#114
  • Jun 24, 2009
  • #114
Well with a larger displacement you have more control. You can make 500+ hp with a calmer cam.
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,293
1,634
214
Acworth, GA
Jun 25, 2009
#115
  • Jun 25, 2009
  • #115
Stopsign32v said:
I don't race anyone at 3,000rpms or below so I see no point in all that torque at 2,000rpms unless you plan to pull your mobile home with your car.
Click to expand...


Amen. Power and torque below 3000rpms is meaningless.

Kurt
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Jun 25, 2009
#116
  • Jun 25, 2009
  • #116
Gearbanger 101 said:
Indeed. If I wanted to start making power above 3,000RPM, I would have bought a Honda.
Click to expand...

LOL. Yep.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Jun 25, 2009
#117
  • Jun 25, 2009
  • #117
revhead347 said:
Amen. Power and torque below 3000rpms is meaningless.

Kurt
Click to expand...
so why do the big boys in racing have big motors?

and what is going to be more fun on the street and around town?

have you people ever heard the statement that ET is a function of torque while trap speed is a function of horsepower?

torque wins races, not horsepower

unbelievable
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jun 25, 2009
#118
  • Jun 25, 2009
  • #118
I think torque and horsepower are only considered meanlingless below 3,000RPM to those who aren't making it. Kind of like when the teacher hands out suckers to the kids in class and she runs out before she gets to the last kid...at which point he starts pouting with the whole "I don't care if you all got suckers...I didn't want one anyway", attitude.
 

Black Stampede

Founding Member
Sep 3, 2002
1,811
2
39
Grand Rapids, MI
Jun 25, 2009
#119
  • Jun 25, 2009
  • #119
BlackVert said:
so why do the big boys in racing have big motors?

and what is going to be more fun on the street and around town?

have you people ever heard the statement that ET is a function of torque while trap speed is a function of horsepower?

torque wins races, not horsepower

unbelievable
Click to expand...

This post is kind of confusing. First you say "what is going to be more fun on the street and around town" implying low end is more fun around town.

Then you say "have you people ever heard the statement that ET is a function of torque while trap speed is a function of horsepower".

Which is ironic to me because how fun a car is on the street is related to trap speed not ET. Example, a guy traps 126 and runs mid 11s. Fairly common with cars unable to get traction. Guy #2 traps 117 and runs mid 11s. He hooks hard.

Which car is going to be more fun on the street? Well it's certainly not going to be guy number 2. Guy #1 traps 9 mph faster and has a car that is gonna be alot more fun to drive around on the streeet then guy #2 whos car without slicks and fancy suspension would probably be around a 12.2 when guy #1's car with slicks is a 10 second car.

I'm just saying, when it comes to the street trap speed says alot more about a car.
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Jun 25, 2009
#120
  • Jun 25, 2009
  • #120
Black Stampede said:
This post is kind of confusing. First you say "what is going to be more fun on the street and around town" implying low end is more fun around town.

Then you say "have you people ever heard the statement that ET is a function of torque while trap speed is a function of horsepower".

Which is ironic to me because how fun a car is on the street is related to trap speed not ET. Example, a guy traps 126 and runs mid 11s. Fairly common with cars unable to get traction. Guy #2 traps 117 and runs mid 11s. He hooks hard.

Which car is going to be more fun on the street? Well it's certainly not going to be guy number 2. Guy #1 traps 9 mph faster and has a car that is gonna be alot more fun to drive around on the streeet then guy #2 whos car without slicks and fancy suspension would probably be around a 12.2 when guy #1's car with slicks is a 10 second car.

I'm just saying, when it comes to the street trap speed says alot more about a car.
Click to expand...

 
Prev
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Next
First Prev 6 of 10 Next Last
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
Ongoing Battle With Hydraulic Lifters
  • hailer06
  • Jun 8, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
159
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 9, 2026
Noobz347
G
Front Sway bar HELP
  • Grabberblueguy77
  • May 28, 2025
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
357
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- May 28, 2025
gkomo
For Sale Borg Warner WC T5, Stock Bell Housing, RAM Clutch Set, Double Hump Cross Member, & Pro 5.0 Shifter
  • AeroCoupe
  • Aug 9, 2025
  • Drivetrain Parts
Replies
1
Views
556
Drivetrain Parts Dec 26, 2025
AeroCoupe
D
Foxbody Misfire 5.0 Swap
  • DPORTER0729
  • May 2, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
569
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 13, 2025
90sickfox
J
Progress Thread Family member 1989 GT- Backstory and updates
  • JRC99
  • Apr 19, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 26, 2025
JRC99
J
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?