• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

C code quarter mile time

  • Thread starter Thread starter robbz28
  • Start date Start date Nov 16, 2011

robbz28

Member
Sep 23, 2009
775
5
19
Epps, LA
Nov 16, 2011
#1
  • Nov 16, 2011
  • #1
I have looked on the web for this and I cannot find the answer im looking for. I can find info for the 289 GT but not for the 2bbl 289. Id like to know what a factory 289 c code automatic with the 2.79 gears would/should run in the 1/4. From what I read the GT ran around a 15.5 give or take a tenth. But that was with 70 more horses than a C code....my math puts a C code around an 17 second or so. The reason I am looking is because I have a 67 c code, I did not rebuild the engine, the PO did....but it runs great, it don't smoke, it don't use oil, it sits and purrs quietly at 500 rpm when idling. If it wasnt for the turbo muffler dual exhaust you wouldnt even know its running. The car just has no get up and go about it. I can make the right rear tire squeal and thats about it. Not that I am wanting a hot rod or anything, i just want to hear from others out there with bone stock 2bbl 289's to get some feedback on how "peppy" their cars are.
I built this car to drive long distances reliably. One of these days Im sure I will upgrade the engine and make it a little hotter (300 horses would be great). I know when I finally put the T-5 thats been sitting under my garage in it and put some 3.73 gears under it that will definately make it feel a lot stronger. Im just happy I can drive it now after the past 2 years of working on it!
 

horseballz

10 Year Member
Sep 30, 2009
824
19
49
Las Vegas, NV
Nov 16, 2011
#2
  • Nov 16, 2011
  • #2
Rob,
If I remember correctly, a well tuned C-code with a dual exhaust upgrade should be able to turn a 16.5 or so. Maybe even a little better.
HTH,
Gene
 

robbz28

Member
Sep 23, 2009
775
5
19
Epps, LA
Nov 16, 2011
#3
  • Nov 16, 2011
  • #3
I put long tube headers, 2.5 inch mandrel dual exhaust, 4 bbl intake and a holley 600 vac secondary and points conversion kit. I know the 4bbl is overkill with the factory heads and compression, but the way i see it is the front barrels are around 300 cfm and if it ever needs the rear then they are there. I was making purchases for the future (331 or 347). I drive a 385 hp 4x4 tundra every day as my commuter and its just wrong for that thing to be faster than my "muscle" car.....knowwhatimean?
 

zookeeper

Founding Member
Aug 25, 2001
3,415
63
109
Rogue River, Oregon
Nov 17, 2011
#4
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #4
When my C-code fastback was stone stock, it ran a 17.76 @ 77 mph at sea level according to my G-Tech accelerometer. I need to run it again to see how it runs, but that's about what they'll do stock.
 

robbz28

Member
Sep 23, 2009
775
5
19
Epps, LA
Nov 17, 2011
#5
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #5
17.7 sounds (and feels) about right although I don't trust a G-tech to be within a second of accurate from my experiences with them. They may be better now than when my buddy had one over 10 years ago when they first come out. Although my goal for now is to have a car i can just enjoy and cruise around in, in the future i would like some grunt to back up the looks.
 

Realmongo

I prefer to be called "Evil Genius"
Founding Member
Oct 10, 2001
2,468
86
99
Western Mass
Nov 17, 2011
#6
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #6
See below link.

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/840382-stock-times-ponies.html
 

robbz28

Member
Sep 23, 2009
775
5
19
Epps, LA
Nov 17, 2011
#7
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #7
Realmongo said:
See below link.

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/840382-stock-times-ponies.html
Click to expand...

Thanks, so the 17 second area is about right seems. Feels like 17 seconds, lol. Feels like 17 minutes seeing how my last toy ran the quarter in 11.9.

BTW realmongo...Blazing Saddles always comes to my mind when i see your screename..."Hey you can't park that horse here, its illegal!........SMACK"
 

Realmongo

I prefer to be called "Evil Genius"
Founding Member
Oct 10, 2001
2,468
86
99
Western Mass
Nov 17, 2011
#8
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #8
Back then, 17 seconds was not such a bad time for a low priced stock car.
 

zookeeper

Founding Member
Aug 25, 2001
3,415
63
109
Rogue River, Oregon
Nov 17, 2011
#9
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #9
Agreed, I mean look at it this way my wife's '69 427 'vette was timed at 15.1 by C&D magazine back in the day and it's a MONSTER compared to my Mustang when it was stock. We also raced on the freeway last year (from 55 to about 85) and the 'vette is still faster. Guess I'll need to keep going with my car...
 

robbz28

Member
Sep 23, 2009
775
5
19
Epps, LA
Nov 17, 2011
#10
  • Nov 17, 2011
  • #10
Back in the day traction was a big issue. If you could get your car to hook up you could get some good times. Today traction is not an issue thus we have seen massively improved ET's. I can turn my 17 second car into a 15 second car with gears and a stall converter and a little tuning, but it's not worth losing the cruisability. I'll gain my speed through good ol airflow and displacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SURGING IDLE / NO IDLE CHECKLIST FOR 1999–2004 MUSTANG GT (4.6L 2V) - Work In Progress
  • Noobz347
  • Aug 30, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
800
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Aug 30, 2025
Noobz347
SURGING IDLE / NO IDLE CHECKLIST FOR 1996–1998 MUSTANG GT (4.6L 2V) - Work In Progress
  • Noobz347
  • Aug 30, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
649
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Aug 30, 2025
Noobz347
3
Eight inches is enough for me...
  • 351MooseStang
  • Nov 27, 2025
  • 1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech
Replies
5
Views
496
1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech Mar 2, 2026
Bullitt347
B
'03 GT Fuel Pump/Pressure/Delivery Issue
  • Brodach
  • Oct 21, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
8
Views
808
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 31, 2025
gkomo
1999 Mustang GT - No Start- Need help understanding the fuel pump circuit and how it works
  • 99gtGuy
  • Nov 4, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
461
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Nov 7, 2025
04newedge-
0
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang 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?