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

Burnout Vid

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joe 5.0
  • Start date Start date Aug 26, 2005

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 26, 2005
#1
  • Aug 26, 2005
  • #1
http://photos.imageevent.com/jtkz13/videos/MVI_0104.AVI
























































Now dont be mad, I never said it was my mustang.

VtaK p0wer yo!
 

CManT1914

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
3,172
2
0
Killeen, Texas
Aug 26, 2005
#2
  • Aug 26, 2005
  • #2


when did you change your name?
 

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 26, 2005
#3
  • Aug 26, 2005
  • #3
This past week, got tired of the old one, noone could ever remember it.
 

CManT1914

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
3,172
2
0
Killeen, Texas
Aug 26, 2005
#4
  • Aug 26, 2005
  • #4
lol, all I remember is there was a "j", a "t", a "k", and a "z".
 

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 26, 2005
#5
  • Aug 26, 2005
  • #5
see, isnt this one easier?
 

SeventyMach1

Keep it lubed .... keep it straight .... and keep
Mar 30, 2005
1,940
3
36
North Carolina
Aug 27, 2005
#6
  • Aug 27, 2005
  • #6
Was that with e-brake engaged? If not, try that next time......

In my RX-7 (rear drive, though) I used to do that all the time.... the rear bumper would clip the pavement if I bumped it too hard, though..... what's crazy is that it was only lowered 3/4" and had stock body kit.....
 

super302

I'd do anything for free Bapples
May 29, 2004
2,878
1
0
Davenport, IA
Aug 27, 2005
#7
  • Aug 27, 2005
  • #7
I was like "who the hell is joe5.0"...i even asked my mom and she didnt know
 

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 27, 2005
#8
  • Aug 27, 2005
  • #8
super302 said:
I was like "who the hell is joe5.0"...i even asked my mom and she didnt know
Click to expand...

Ask her again, but she knows me as "Joe5.00000000000000000000000hhhhhmygod!!!!"

 

GRGT1994

New Member
Sep 22, 2004
1,034
0
0
Aug 27, 2005
#9
  • Aug 27, 2005
  • #9
Looks like there was no parking brake involved there. The rear wheels rotate freely from the get go.

But doesn't that just show you how pointless front wheel drive is in a performance car? The thing is spinning the crap out of the tires, and it still manages to look whimpy. (not that it takes ANY power to spin the front tires)
 

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 27, 2005
#10
  • Aug 27, 2005
  • #10
1. The parking brake was on, it just sucks,

2. Its not a performance car, its a luxury sporty coupe. FYI its faster in a straight line & curved line than any stock 94-98 GT.

3. And how is it easy to do that in a fwd car with LSD? 60% of the weight is over the drive wheels, unlike a mustang where only 40% of the weight is over the drive wheels.

4. Please tell me how it looks wimpy? Two 30' black marks and lots of smoke is wimpy? The burnout I did right before that was twice as smoky too, and the back wheels did lock up, I just didnt video it because I wasnt sure it would even sit still long enough to get smoke.
 

94gts

Member
Jul 4, 2004
873
0
16
Carmel, New York
Aug 27, 2005
#11
  • Aug 27, 2005
  • #11
Joe 5.0 said:
Ask her again, but she knows me as "Joe5.00000000000000000000000hhhhhmygod!!!!"
Click to expand...



 

GRGT1994

New Member
Sep 22, 2004
1,034
0
0
Aug 28, 2005
#12
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #12
Joe 5.0 said:
1. The parking brake was on, it just sucks,

2. Its not a performance car, its a luxury sporty coupe. FYI its faster in a straight line & curved line than any stock 94-98 GT.

3. And how is it easy to do that in a fwd car with LSD? 60% of the weight is over the drive wheels, unlike a mustang where only 40% of the weight is over the drive wheels.

4. Please tell me how it looks wimpy? Two 30' black marks and lots of smoke is wimpy? The burnout I did right before that was twice as smoky too, and the back wheels did lock up, I just didnt video it because I wasnt sure it would even sit still long enough to get smoke.
Click to expand...
Acura stives to put its TL in the same category as the BMW 3 series. Not a performance car? Are we on the same planet here? (The Acura web site refers to ALL of their cars as "performance" - save the TSX. Was that a TSX? Sorry for the miss-speak if it was.)

But anyway, narrow 4-season tires hold little torque. Add to that, the weight transfer is in the wrong direction. So ya, it's beyond easy, it's an absolute given that you will get 30' wheel spin (regardless of your torque rating). Hence, W I M P Y.

Simple enough?
 

CManT1914

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
3,172
2
0
Killeen, Texas
Aug 28, 2005
#13
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #13
GRGT1994 said:
Acura stives to put its TL in the same category as the BMW 3 series. Not a performance car? Are we on the same planet here?

But anyway, narrow 4-season tires hold little torque. Add to that, the weight transfer is in the wrong direction. So ya, it's beyond easy, it's an absolute given that you will get 30' wheel spin (regardless of your torque rating). Hence, W I M P Y.

Simple enough?
Click to expand...

I've driven plenty of FWD 4 cylinders that wouldn't spin the tires at all, let alone for 30'. Even with some crappy 155 tires on there, they wouldn't spin. That's not bad.
 

WhiteStallionGT

Member
Aug 19, 2004
465
0
17
Northern VA / VT
Aug 28, 2005
#14
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #14
super302 said:
I was like "who the hell is joe5.0"...i even asked my mom and she didnt know
Click to expand...

Your mom knows me though.
 

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 28, 2005
#15
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #15
GRGT1994 said:
Acura stives to put its TL in the same category as the BMW 3 series. Not a performance car? Are we on the same planet here? (The Acura web site refers to ALL of their cars as "performance" - save the TSX. Was that a TSX? Sorry for the miss-speak if it was.)

But anyway, narrow 4-season tires hold little torque. Add to that, the weight transfer is in the wrong direction. So ya, it's beyond easy, it's an absolute given that you will get 30' wheel spin (regardless of your torque rating). Hence, W I M P Y.

Simple enough?
Click to expand...

Yeah I guess its wimpy as hell. Too bad it dyno's as much as bolt-ons 5.0's (in hp that is), and should run 13's with TWO mods totalling $400 (lightweight wheels/dr's + CAI).

But I guess theres a hater in every crowd.

But if I posted a vid of my mustang doing the same thing on stock POS tires it'd be manly.
 

GRGT1994

New Member
Sep 22, 2004
1,034
0
0
Aug 28, 2005
#16
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #16
Dude, I don't hate the car. It's a great package for what it is. But comparing it to a Mustang, come on. I guess I was just trying to point out how silly a FF car looks, hopelessly scratching for traction as all of it transfers to the passive rear wheels.

And if what you say is right, then yes, it is truly impressive that different tires and a cold air setup would drop nearly 2 seconds off an E.T. (Query whether it's realistic)

Anyway, if you can't appreciate the difference between the two types of cars (even though you own one of each) then no amount of pithy remarks from me will ever get you there. Peace.
 

Joe 5.0

Founding Member
Feb 1, 2002
1,184
2
38
Macomb, MI (metro detroit)
Aug 28, 2005
#17
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #17
Well maybe I'm insane, its just that every other fwd car even with decent power usually cant break em loose like that. I understand the difference between the two, and trust me I know the mustang is much more of a true performance car than my CL will ever be. Actually I have 19's that are going on, along with a couple subs & lowering springs, so its MUCH more of a cruiser.

And FWIW, it ran 14.5 @ 96.5mph 100% bone stock, 14.2 @ 98.5 with dr's on stock 17's, and I'm hoping that the CAI + lighter wheels will get some 13.9's. If it doesnt I'll sell the extra wheels/tires, I'm just toying around with it.
 

Swarzkopf

Member
Sep 23, 2004
973
0
16
Pittsburgh
Aug 28, 2005
#18
  • Aug 28, 2005
  • #18
LOL!!

I've never seen a car like that post a burnout video. Cool stuff.

I've driven plenty of FWD 4 cylinders that wouldn't spin the tires at all, let alone for 30'. Even with some crappy 155 tires on there, they wouldn't spin. That's not bad.
Click to expand...

Really? Automatic or manual? I've been able to get some rubber in ANY manual car I've ever driven...I've driven plenty of automatics that won't (even rear drivers that I've tried brake torquing).

Fack, I was able to lay a decent patch rolling in second in my buddy's 2000 Civic EX....

When my 5.0 was stock I had to brake torque it to spin em up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Need help and Advise - 89 Problem Child
  • Sheela
  • Oct 28, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
178
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 28, 2025
evintho
J
Help Figuring Motor Choice(Possible future turbo)?
  • jaygee15
  • Dec 14, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
13
Views
807
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 3, 2026
Jarhead67
J
A
95 Gt intermittent backfire
  • A_A_Ron
  • May 26, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
466
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 26, 2025
A_A_Ron
A
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
11K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
F
Progress Thread My First Mustang - Pace Car Mysteries
  • First Mustang
  • Oct 24, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
26
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 26, 2024
ustacould
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?