Tech talk, 5.0 HO vs LSx...

tstang21 · Feb 27, 2009

i look at it realisticaly that LSx motors have bigger cubes w/ modern technology compared to the 5.0 meaning acoarse more power. being an all car guy, i admire the LSx but for the price for a fun blasting torquey V8, the 5.0 dominates that and the aftermarket. also dont forget that the 03-04 terminators took out both the Z28/TRANS AM and knocked them out of buisness. but chevy has the vette zo6 that will knock out almost anything on the road.

example : i ran my friend against his 03 z28 w/mods. out the hole i had 2 car lengths on him ( im geared, he's not) but by 4th gear, his top end kicked in. for me, my opinion i dont care if i loose a race or dont make 400rwhp. im just glad that i own a fun driving good sounding car.

ratio411 · Feb 28, 2009

tstang21 said:
i ran my friend against his 03 z28 w/mods. out the hole i had 2 car lengths on him ( im geared, he's not) but by 4th gear, his top end kicked in.

Having owned these cars in question...
Here's a tip for anyone facing one down:
If you want any chance at all, go for the holeshot and try to stay out ahead.
From a roll, they are lightning fast. From a stop, the LSx is lacking.
Generally speaking of course.

Now the perfectionist in me is going to nit-pick. Nothing personal.
There was no 03 F-body.

The "terminator" Ford, I am assuming is the Cobra with a blower?
The LSx guys take it as a compliment that Ford has to resort to a blower
to beat them!

Also, there seems to be talk about the Stang being cheaper, so it outsold
the F-car into extinction. I really don't see that either. Remember that I
was buying these cars since 93, shopping them against each other on the
showroom floor... The fact is that they were generally always priced the
same. HOWEVER, ONE BIG DIFFERENCE... The F-body came with alot more
for the money. Base engine had at least 44 more cubes, base tranny was
a T56, and big 4 wheel anti-lock discs were standard.

Shopping between them wasn't apples-apples in 93, as the old Fox was still
out against the new F-body... But in 95 they were both new and head to
head, like it or not. I was wanting the Ford, and on paper the prices looked
the same, but when you added options to the Stang that were standard on
the F-car, the Stang price went through the roof, and the Base Z was still a
much stronger car. It was a no brainer back then. Then the LSx came out in
98 and I got a 3rd. One drive and I knew I had to have it. That was the car
that pulled 318 bone stock, save the muffler. That was on a Dynojet at the
Car Craft Nats. I have seen later LS1s pull 330 with NO mods, consistently,
after they started using LS6 intakes on them (without telling anyone).

I sound like an LSx commercial. I don't want to, but I have definate opinions
shaped by the fact that I have owned them and shopped them back when
they were head to head on the showroom floors.

Also, another gripe about Ford... When you looked at an SS Camaro, actually
outsourced from SLP, the dealers rarely took under sticker, but they didn't ofter
pile on a 'dealer added value' price like Ford was notorious for. I don't know
about the past 5 or 6 years, but back then, you couldn't look at an SVO Ford
without the dealer expecting $10-15k added to the sticker. SLP cars rarely
had this except for a few rare issues, and the added price was never nearly
as much. Ford dealers just always seemed far more greedy than others.
This turned even this die hard Ford guy off of buying their product.

Kinda glad though. I am a much more rounded car lover now and opened
myself to the LTx and LSx experience. Had Ford offered the Stang for less,
considering how much less car it was, I would have settled for one back
then, rather than soil my soul with buying a GM just for extra brakes and
a T56. The fact that Ford expected me to accept their car as apples to
apples, I compared them that way and they lost for all the reasons you
folks have mentioned now as 'common sense'.

final5-0 · Feb 28, 2009

ratio411 said:
Having owned these cars in question...

Good info for sure

As a wise man once said ...

I'll listen to a man with an experience
more than
A man who only has an opinion

The "terminator" Ford, I am assuming is the Cobra with a blower?
The LSx guys take it as a compliment that Ford has to resort to a blower
to beat them!

Well ... I'm a die hard Ford Man

I see the fact that Ford had to put a blower on it as ......

In Your Face Evidence

The short commings of the Mod Motor are many

Its sucky low end is the result of it being too small

As for me ... I wanna drive a hot rod ... I Built :Word:
and
I want it to be a Ford

Anybody can buy a fast factory built car ... Be it a Ford or a Chevy

Again ... Good Info

Grady

Pokageek · Feb 28, 2009

Again, just like the Ford, the maro has to be modded to even get to the 1:1 rwhp ratio let alone higher ...and the h/c/i mods are already there from the factory AND its got a 50 cube vantage. So its a lot of internet hype in my o.

Yep, I had the z28 - and I liked the Ford better. The 5.0 sounds 10x better and has a much cooler looking interior with no cheezy plastics. Being in a ls1 car I noticed it did not have the low end grunt of the Lt1 *325TQ@2000rpm, so I liked it even less.

tstang21 · Feb 28, 2009

thats true with the 03 terminators. with 5.4 liters, they shouldve stayed all motor instead to outperform cameros/firebirds. i have no idea what ford was thinking.

P.S. i love the 03 04 terminators

ratio411 · Feb 28, 2009

Pokageek said:
Being in a ls1 car I noticed it did not have the low end grunt of the Lt1 *325TQ@2000rpm, so I liked it even less.

I had two LT1s and loved the torque, but OMG when that LS1 turns up,
it's amazing! I guess being into 289/302 since I was a kid, and the fact that
those two don't make any power until they scream, I felt at home with the LSx.

I really have a pet peeve about folks that have a 302 and expect low rpm
torque. The stroke is too short for torque. Build it to turn up and scream.
That is how you get big power out of an SBF.

I guess I answer my own curiousities right there.
I am trying to get what is in fact a 302, to turn up and have power,
while still being street friendly, and lost sight of my own long time advice.

This car has a 302. I keep calling it a 5.0 and lost the connection there.
A 302 MUST SCREAM to make power. E7 heads and a squatty SN95 intake
aren't going to scream.

Pokageek · Feb 28, 2009

I see your point. rwhp is one thing but what impresses me the most is HP + drivebility the way I want it. And I am picky so there's no right or wrong answer.

I dunno man..I loved the car but I just could not get the low end out of the 302 I wanted. After having the Z28, I was spoiled by 350 cubes and it never seemed enough. Maybe I am crazy but I want both. I guess the only way to get it is 302 blown by KB then add H/C/I if you like ..and then I might add, you will be way over the mark and the $$. You can sure it up without the blower using gears but even with 3.90's it wasn't the same for me. There's just no replacing displacement, and the L engines have the displacement of course. .. the core part needed.

ratio411 · Feb 28, 2009

Thinking about my LS1, it was light on torque in it's dyno session.
318/328, and most LSx I have seen only show about 10 ftlbs more torque than HP,
almost as a rule. My peak TQ was around 4500, if memory serves.
HP peak was high rpm as well. Stock HCI

final5-0 · Feb 28, 2009

I do see what you are saying about ...
making a sbf turn rpm to make big power

I grew up with 260, 289, & 302 carbed motors

That is the basis or foundation and perspective I had when I returned
to this hobby back in the mid 90's

I quickly found the new technology of fuel injection and silver box made
my beloved sbf feel so much bigger than ever

After seeing what could be done with the cam to time valve events

I knew the low end could be pumped up all the more
I also knew the spark curve would add more
I noticed back then ... NOBODY was using LT's

anyway ...........

I was so excited
I was chompin at the bit to get started and see how much punch I could
obtain from all the new technology

I was not disappointed at all

I found more than I expected from only 302 cubic inches :Word:

For a street motor
I ain't all that interested in power that takes a while to be felt

Grady

Black Stampede · Mar 1, 2009

thethirdeye88 said:
one of my mechanics has a 416W that ran 6's in the 1/8th on motor...its set up for bottle but never ran it...its also for sale...

Oh really? I know a guy that got a mountain bike for his birthday.

fastgtfairlane · Mar 1, 2009

the lsx makes more power than an oldschool 5.0 and it should.
the heads are so much better than any factory ford engine ever made. with the exception of the boss heads and the hi rise 427 heads from the 60s, gm has always made better heads than ford especially on the small blocks. the lsx engine is very impressive but its still a gm and the body of the f bodys are turd boxes. i would rather have my sn95 5.0 any day of the week. i dont give a damn if its slower factory but what car do most of us have that remains stock? not to mention my 5.0 mustang is much easier to work on and the entire engine is completely exposed not have way hidden under the windshield. oh dont forget about doing a tune up on a lsx f body. what a pita

99FiveOh · Mar 1, 2009

Would have been a much different story if Ford would have evened up the playing field with factory installed 351's back in the Fox days. If they started in 87, imagine the kind of power these things would be making as of 93 or 94, and especially if they were aluminum headed 351's.

They could have been putting 300 to the tires with ease and with perfect drivability. And would it have really costed Ford that much more to build some power into these cars and call themselves king of the HP wars? Probably not. But now we can buy these cars for dirt cheap and paint our own masterpiece, exactly the way we think FORD should have done it!

But to me, the build quality of a Mustang has for awhile been superior to any F body!

DavidNC · Mar 1, 2009

ratio411 said:
Don't flame me too hard. I want a serious tech discussion.
I know engines in general and I am first and foremost a Ford man.
However, I don't know the specifics on EFI 5.0 HO powered vehicles,
AND
even though I am a Ford man, I know a good thing when I see it and
I like many other makes/models.

I am best with general engine theory and hands on with carb'd old
school engines. I joined Stangnet to hang out in the Classics section and
that is where all my post count has been. Mostly talking about carbs,
points to electronic conversions, and 351c swaps.
Nothing modern whatsoever.

I knew a good thing when the 4th (last) gen Z28s were out and owned 3
over the years for daily drivers. My last was an LS1/T-56 that I used as my
avitar when I joined Stangnet just to have some fun with fellow Ford lovers.

Anyway, this car made 318 rwhp with nothing more than a muffler change.
Nothing else, and you notice I said muffler, not cat-back, ORP, or headers.

Then I come here, to the 5.0 EFI HO section of Stangnet and read scary things like:

So what is it about an LSx that it can be dead stock, dead reliable, idle at 600 rpm,
get 30 mpg, and still have 300+ rwhp?

Why should I have to go radical to get the same results with my beloved 302?

I've had four fox body 5.0's. I had a 93 low mileage limited edition and realized that I did't want to mod it to go faster, so I got a 97 formula auto that had some pcm work and slp exhaust. It was very faster that the fox and cheaper to buy. My son got it from me and I got a 97 trans am ws6 with pcm work and slp exhaust. I loved it, but wanted it to be faster. At the time it was very expensive to do any work on the LT1, so I sold it and built the sn95 351w tko 500 I now drive.

My 95 is way faster than either of the LT1's and is as comfortable. It's a lot easier and cheaper to work on than the LT1's. I do get less mpg (16/20 vrs 18/17).

In my opinion, I don't see making a 5.0 as fast as a LT1 or LSx without loosing road manners and emmissions legality. I still have emissions, AC and a trunk full of stereo eqpt.

To summarize, LT1's and LSx's are faster out of the box and are very well behaved. However, I love to tinker and wanted to go faster than the stock fbody. It was a lot cheaper to build up a 351w based car that maintained all all road manners. I can only imagine how much faster a 408 could be.

I went with the sn95 body style for better brakes, larger wheel wells, interior that I liked better and that is roomier, and a more solid body construction.

Pokageek · Mar 2, 2009

Oh sheesh it was a bit of a pain getting to the last plug or 2 on that passenger side LET ALONE modding my F-body. Yes, half the eng is under the dash lol.

ratio411 · Mar 2, 2009

If I used the cruise, and didn't run the A/C, my LS1 T56 got a hair away from 30 mph
on the interstate. 3.42 gears and aluminum shaft.

I wonder if a 351w, or better yet 408 with EFI and T56, in an SN95 could match that?
I bet it could get close. Especially if the car were fitted with the same shaft and lowered
for more areodynamics...

Thoughts?

Pokageek · Mar 2, 2009

I am getting a solid 20mpg on my 414c.i. ONLY when I don't get on it. 3.55 gears and 70 more c.i. ...I also have a .64 5th.

Black Stampede · Mar 3, 2009

ratio411 said:
If I used the cruise, and didn't run the A/C, my LS1 T56got a hair away from 30 mph on the interstate.

Wow, sounds like a really fast car.

ratio411 · Mar 3, 2009

Yeah, yeah... I deserve that!

I meant MPG... but I didn't need to tell you that.

Smart@$$!

Black Stampede · Mar 3, 2009

ratio411 said:
Yeah, yeah... I deserve that!

I meant MPG... but I didn't need to tell you that.

Smart@$$!

Tech talk, 5.0 HO vs LSx...

tstang21

Member

ratio411

final5-0

Mustang Master

Pokageek

Active Member

tstang21

Member

ratio411

Pokageek

Active Member

ratio411

final5-0

Mustang Master

Black Stampede

fastgtfairlane

New Member

99FiveOh

DavidNC

Pokageek

Active Member

ratio411

Pokageek

Active Member

Black Stampede

ratio411

Black Stampede

Similar threads

Tech talk, 5.0 HO vs LSx...

Member

Mustang Master

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Mustang Master

New Member

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency