• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

86 5.0 beat by a 4cyl altima???sound right

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnsplowing207
  • Start date Start date Mar 8, 2010
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
J

johnsplowing207

New Member
Mar 1, 2010
99
0
0
sanford maine
Mar 8, 2010
#1
  • Mar 8, 2010
  • #1
ok before I took my motor apart I raced a friend at the track with a 99 altima 2.4 4cyl 5 speed.took me in the 1/8 mile.got me off the line twice and beat me twice.on the 1/4 mile I took it twice but not by much.does this seem right for a 86 mustang on 30k miles with a stock rebuild?
altima was stock except for gutted cat and CAI
 

SpartaPerformance

10 Year Member
Nov 5, 2006
2,517
61
89
Long Island NY
Mar 8, 2010
#2
  • Mar 8, 2010
  • #2
It is possible. He took you off the light but what were the 1/4 mile times? Did the Altima run faster? Is your car stock? (I hope)
 
J

johnsplowing207

New Member
Mar 1, 2010
99
0
0
sanford maine
Mar 8, 2010
#3
  • Mar 8, 2010
  • #3
I dont remember the times we were just having fun.stock stang except for the k&n cai and flowmaster catback.couldnt even catch my dad in his 02 sable 3.0.he was pulling away from me.
 

tannerc91gt

This last 25% is foreign territory at this point
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
4,392
2,967
234
Indiana
Mar 9, 2010
#4
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #4
This may come as a suprise to some people, but stock 5 liter mustangs are not fast and are slower than many newer sedans....
86 wasn't exactly the peak of the 5.0 performance either.
With a few mods you could roll the hell out of that altima though
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,260
17,945
224
Massachusetts
Mar 9, 2010
#5
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #5
A 3.5 would rape it...but a 2.5...they are dogs. Prob mid to high 15 sec car there
 

f8tlfiveo

My wife likes my spool and blow-off valve.
Aug 8, 2007
1,585
102
64
Lancaster, PA
Mar 9, 2010
#6
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #6
I had an 86 that ran 14.5, stock other than exhaust.. There is no way that a 2.5 altima is going to beat a stock mustang..I am driving a 2010 2.5 altima right now as a rental car and it is a dog. At least a 16.. But prob worse in the 1/4 mile.. If your stang is auto that doesent help though. Mine was a 5 SPd.. Not all mustangs are created equal either though..
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Mar 9, 2010
#7
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #7
'86 Mustangs are DOGS stock. If your car is an auto, I'm not surprised at all.
 
J

johnsplowing207

New Member
Mar 1, 2010
99
0
0
sanford maine
Mar 9, 2010
#8
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #8
its a 5 speed
 

tannerc91gt

This last 25% is foreign territory at this point
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
4,392
2,967
234
Indiana
Mar 9, 2010
#9
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #9
Driver mod?
 

SVT32VDOHC

waiting for the next hack atta
Founding Member
Nov 22, 2001
3,501
28
119
Motor City
Mar 9, 2010
#10
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #10
It's possible, they had 200HP. I had a 98 Grand Prix GTP 2door that was bone stock beside a drop in K&N. It ran 14.25@99MPH with a 2.2 60ft time. I beat a couple older fox bodies on the street very easily. Stomped them from a light, edged them from a 40-60 roll.
 

85_SS_302_Coupe

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end
15 Year Member
Nov 11, 2003
6,945
1,598
223
Northern KY
Mar 9, 2010
#11
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #11
If he beat you out of the hole (maybe because you spun?) then it's quite possible. Like mentioned, these cars really weren't rockets when they were totally stock. They were fun and torquey but there are seriously minivans with more HP and V6's that will destroy a stock 5.0 in both torque and horsepower. Look at the new 3.7 Mustang engine...300hp and i think 280lb/ft of torque. That is badass for a V6 and it still gets 30mph.
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,260
17,945
224
Massachusetts
Mar 9, 2010
#12
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #12
Those early altimas were also small cars. They've grown in size the last 10 years to the boat they are today. A 200HP 4-banger could easily move that little car around with some pep.

I'd take a nice 3.5 SE-R though...too bad it's FWD.
 

SpartaPerformance

10 Year Member
Nov 5, 2006
2,517
61
89
Long Island NY
Mar 9, 2010
#13
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #13
Perhaps your shifting needs work. Either way sounds like you need a few bolt ons anyway like pulleys, and a good power tune.
 

7upstang91

10 Year Member
May 30, 2008
936
124
74
Florida
Mar 9, 2010
#14
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #14
I've seen a 2.5 Altima run 10.5xxx in the 1/8. not to terribly bad.
 

SVO1

Lord of The somethin' somethin' somethin', hell, I
Oct 25, 1999
4,592
1
0
Lord of uh, hmm what was it again?
Mar 10, 2010
#15
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #15
My old 86 GT with long tubes, X pipe and cat back (and 167K) ran consistent 13.90-.94's @ 100-101 in the 1/4. It had 3.08's, circle track slicks, and I bought it from the orig owner, only thing done engine wise was v/c gaskets in those 167k. What gears in this car? 2.73's even with a few mods would really kill the times, especially with a bad driver. Good tires?
Also where were you shifting? I found my car ran it's best times if it was shifted at 5k on the nose. It would slow down as much as .7 shifting it at 5500 RPM.
 

RsStanG1987

I shaved all my pubes playing this game.
10 Year Member
Mar 13, 2004
569
9
79
Dupont PA
Mar 10, 2010
#16
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #16
Actually its exactly how it should be 86's had like what 200hp at the flywheel? The altima probabbly has around the same hp. stock 5.0's arent that fast. My 08 G6 would slaughter a stock 5.0 and its a pontiac.
 
B

bonestock94

Member
Apr 12, 2005
61
0
6
NY
Mar 10, 2010
#17
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #17
This is a 99 Altima, the older one, rated at 150 hp.
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Mar 10, 2010
#18
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #18
SVO1 said:
My old 86 GT with long tubes, X pipe and cat back (and 167K) ran consistent 13.90-.94's @ 100-101 in the 1/4. It had 3.08's, circle track slicks, and I bought it from the orig owner, only thing done engine wise was v/c gaskets in those 167k. What gears in this car? 2.73's even with a few mods would really kill the times, especially with a bad driver. Good tires?
Also where were you shifting? I found my car ran it's best times if it was shifted at 5k on the nose. It would slow down as much as .7 shifting it at 5500 RPM.
Click to expand...

100-101? That's pretty good. Last time I was at the track, my car was trapping (don't anybody laugh) like 96-97. I have 3.73s, shorty headers/full exhaust, Explorer intake, pulleys, 70mm TB, etc, etc. That was low-14 sec ETs on street tires and 17" wheels. The car also had a hot-start issue, so I literally drove it to the track, made three passes, and drove home without ever turning it off. I'm hoping to go back this season with real tires, be able to turn the car off and let it cool down between passes and nab mid/high 13s (as lame as that sounds, haha). I'll be curious to see if I break 100mph.

Anyway, what really kills the '86 are the damn shrouded-valve E6 heads. A car like mine with E7s instead of E6s would probably run a full second faster in the 1/4.
 

fiveohwblow

Official Member
15 Year Member
Jul 21, 2005
2,169
145
155
Mar 10, 2010
#19
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #19
NikwoaC said:
100-101? That's pretty good. Last time I was at the track, my car was trapping (don't anybody laugh) like 96-97. I have 3.73s, shorty headers/full exhaust, Explorer intake, pulleys, 70mm TB, etc, etc. That was low-14 sec ETs on street tires and 17" wheels. The car also had a hot-start issue, so I literally drove it to the track, made three passes, and drove home without ever turning it off. I'm hoping to go back this season with real tires, be able to turn the car off and let it cool down between passes and nab mid/high 13s (as lame as that sounds, haha). I'll be curious to see if I break 100mph.

Anyway, what really kills the '86 are the damn shrouded-valve E6 heads. A car like mine with E7s instead of E6s would probably run a full second faster in the 1/4.
Click to expand...

Oh wait... sorry you said NOT to laugh.
 
J

johnsplowing207

New Member
Mar 1, 2010
99
0
0
sanford maine
Mar 10, 2010
#20
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #20
with gt 40 heads,4vr pistons,tfs1 cam,1.6 rr's,explorer intake,70mm tb,maf conversion, cobra 70mm maf cal'd for 19lb'ers,k&n cai,aftermarket headers,offroad h-pipe and flowmaster cat back I should get the little ba$tard,lol
thats going to be my set up.if anyone has anything against that or if they think I should change anything let me know.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 1994 Cobra Supercharger install
  • from6to8
  • Sep 25, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 20 21 22
Replies
420
Views
9K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
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
626
Drivetrain Parts Dec 26, 2025
AeroCoupe
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
E
Finished my Fox Hydroboost Install - Tips
  • Engineer Duane
  • Apr 9, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 5, 2025
Engineer Duane
E
Specific Cam Questions that Google can't seem to answer...
  • ChillPhatCat
  • Jun 20, 2024
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech
Replies
3
Views
800
2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech Jun 22, 2024
ChillPhatCat
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang 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?