CobraM23
Founding Member
I ran a 15.07@91.3 with a 2.23 60' with my mods below but that was at a 3100' DA. Corrected thats a 14.5@92.5 which seems about right for the mods ive done.
BC5200 said:I've got a 96 GT auto and ran 15.4 @ 90 mph with 2 chamber flows, 4.10 gears, cold air intake, Under Drive Pulleys and Timing Adjuster
BTW- I had a 2.0 60ft time
These cars are just really slow.
AZGT said:I have a 1997 GT Auto with the following mods:
Off road x pipe
2 chamber Flowmasters
3.73 gears
K&N
FMS C Springs
I took the car to the track a while back and was very dissapointed. The car ran 15.8s at about 87 MPH with a 2.3 60 ft time. Traction was not a problem. I see new v6 5 speeds duplicating these timesShouldn't my car be faster, especially with the gears? Weather wasn't too good-muggy after one of our Tucson monsoon storms. Any ideas?
AZGT said:I have a 1997 GT Auto with the following mods:
Off road x pipe
2 chamber Flowmasters
3.73 gears
K&N
FMS C Springs
I took the car to the track a while back and was very dissapointed. The car ran 15.8s at about 87 MPH with a 2.3 60 ft time. Traction was not a problem. I see new v6 5 speeds duplicating these timesShouldn't my car be faster, especially with the gears? Weather wasn't too good-muggy after one of our Tucson monsoon storms. Any ideas?
WOW. ive only came across a couple of v6 stangs at the track and they were running in the low 16's high 15's.Wickky said:geeeze why are the new v6 so fast compared to the v8's my friend has a v6 with 4.10 gears, CAI, underdrives and 17x9's and runs a 14.48
mogs01gt said:When you buy a GM, all you get is a motor that makes good power and a nice tranny.
I agree wholeheartedly. We can mod our stangs & make them run. F-bodies were pretty much maxed & cost 50% more. No deal. No way. I'll take my Stang over an F-body or even whatever GM comes up w/ in the future anyday.97predator said:by not overpowering the 4.6, ford kept the mustang alive. it sucks for those of us who want speed, but hey speed cost. too much obviously since the f bodies are no more. they had so much power they put themselves out of the market. great cars, but hey they are no more. the ls1 in the f body makes 56 hp/L while the 4.6 makes 55hp/L. so the engines are equal in power per liter. add another liter and you have your f body power. but why pay 30,000 + for an f body when you can get a GT for around 20,000 and then supercharge it and make more power? Parts for f bodies are way expensive. I saw long tubes for over a grand. hells no! I love all muscle cars, but the mustang is the best bang for the buck. Spend 3,000 and get an intercooled procharger. then your car wont be slow.
14.2 w/out PI heads is great indeed. Good run.KJ Hoppus said:i ran 14.2 /w 2.0 60ft in a 98 Auto with only: Mac cai, mac o/r xpipe, flows, steeda pullies and t/a, control arms, stock gears, and S.D. Coils and livewires.
MotleyCrue said:Not trying to shift direction of this thread, just a question, you guys say the 96-98 Mustangs need a head swap, why would ford put heads that didnt perform well on a Mustang? I dont understand. Wouldnt they try their best to keep the competition close between the mustang and the Fbodys? Can someone explain that to me? Thanks
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?