will a stock 5.0 beat a stock 4.6?

thomas91169 · Jul 13, 2006

stock for stock with equal drivers, a 99+ GT will trounce the 5.0.

now stick a 12 year old in the 99 GT and a 35 year old whos had the same car for 15 of those years, and it might be another story............from a launch. though im sure even a 12 year old can do some damage from a roll, i mean hell, it works for all the honduh kids.

CanadaStang · Jul 13, 2006

BurningRubber said:
Im not a "kid", dont suck at driving, and never said that I lost to a stock 5.0...

Whenever you guys want to stop ragging on me is fine with me. All that I said is that a 5.0 LX is capable of hitting high 13's. Ive seen timeslips of stock 5.0 coupes hitting a 13.9x before, and Gearbanger is right, thats rare as horse*****. I didnt say that its gonna happen every time, but some people take it like I said "THE 4.6 WILL NEVER WIN AGAINST A 5.0". All I said was that it is possible if you are a real good driver with the 5.0 coupe, to beat a stock 99+ GT. There are a few guys on here with a few bolt ons and their 1/4 mile times in their sigs with 5 speed cars that cant manage better than 14.3... Then again, there are people that have pulled a high 13 in a bone stock down to the filter 99+ GT.

So lets stop ragging on me when all I gave was my opinion on it, just like everyone else did. I wasnt bashing the 4.6's or calling anyone out, so wtf is everyone giving me a hard time for?

Lets put it like this, equal drivers both cars are stock then the 4.6 should win. BUT, if the 5.0 has a better driver then I wouldnt put it past him to beat the GT.

Not meaning to rag on you, and yes it certainly is possible as I've beat 99' up GT's with my LX but not without the 99' up driver either being real bad or he smokes off the line. My LX has lots of low end grunt so traction is always an issue with street tires. If I'm running DR's and they aren't, I'll be waaay ahead in the eighth but I usually end up getting passed by the end of the 1/4 if they can drive.

As far as 1/4 mile times go, it all depends on track prep, track elevation and temp/humidity. A 99' GT that has run 13.9 at sea level on a cool dry day will never see times even close to that at another track on a warm humid day at 3500ft elevation. So comparing two different cars at different tracks on different days really doesn't mean much, that's why some people will have thier times corrected to sea level at 68 degrees.

BurningRubber · Jul 13, 2006

Canadastang- No offense taken, there were only a couple posts that irked me... haha.

Ill try and personally settle this. Mustang Week is coming up, and with luck if this years drag night is like last years drag night, I will personally line my near stock (intake, catback) GT up against a stock 5.0, or with equal mods.

My car went a 9 flat in the 1/8th with the previous owner, I havnt ran it yet at the track. Im not a bad driver by any means, but im still learning the car as I dont beat on it every single second, but I can definatly hold my own when Im rowing the gears.

So yeah, if anyone wants to settle it I will TRY (cant promise for sure) to line my GT up against a stock 5.0 at the track. Im sure there will be quite a few.

CanadaStang · Jul 14, 2006

BurningRubber said:
Canadastang- No offense taken, there were only a couple posts that irked me... haha.

Ill try and personally settle this. Mustang Week is coming up, and with luck if this years drag night is like last years drag night, I will personally line my near stock (intake, catback) GT up against a stock 5.0, or with equal mods.

My car went a 9 flat in the 1/8th with the previous owner, I havnt ran it yet at the track. Im not a bad driver by any means, but im still learning the car as I dont beat on it every single second, but I can definatly hold my own when Im rowing the gears.

So yeah, if anyone wants to settle it I will TRY (cant promise for sure) to line my GT up against a stock 5.0 at the track. Im sure there will be quite a few.

Cool!! You'll have your work cut out to beat one in the 1/8th though. Just DR's will get a 5.0 down into the high 8's, but if your track is a full 1/4, then they'll go on to wheez through the lights in the mid or higher 14's. Stick a set of gears and DR's and they'll scoot pretty good in the 1/8th, it's just once again, after all that low end grunt is used up there's not much left for the other 1/2 of the 1/4 mile. Think of the non-pi Stangs, only with more torque lower in the rpm's.

BurningRubber · Jul 14, 2006

CanadaStang said:
Think of the non-pi Stangs, only with more torque lower in the rpm's.

Sounds about right. Ive driven both, and the 5.0's definatly get out of the hole better. Even in a 94-95 5.0 vs. a 96-98.

It takes a second before the non-pi 4.6's start to take off, but the 5.0 puts the tourqe down as soon as you mash the gas.

They both felt like they choked off in the higher RPM's though... My 00 feels alot better in that respect, but thats expected.

Strype · Jul 14, 2006

You can't just say a "5.0"!!!

The convertibles weighed in at around 3400-3500lbs I beleive...

The hatches all weighed in around 3300-3400lbs I beleive...

The NOTCH weighed in around 2900lbs

You guys are comparing apples and oranges. My coupe, BONE STOCK except for exhaust and a K&N ran a 9.0 in the 1/8 with street strip tires. My old Convertible I had ran a 9.5 at best with headers/exhaust/3.55's and no street strip radials.

The notches will run an LT1 down in stock fashion because they weigh nothing.

I'll get my buddys to drive my 01 GT at the track, against my still stock 93 Notch and settle it once and for all

PS: I own page 3

timeless2 · Jul 14, 2006

Strype said:
PS: I own page 3

The cool kids, at 40 posts per page, are still on page two.

Gearbanger 101 · Jul 14, 2006

timeless2 said:
The cool kids, at 40 posts per page, are still on page two.

timeless2 · Jul 14, 2006

Gearbanger 101 said:

Nice edit.

I <3

Gearbanger 101 · Jul 14, 2006

timeless2 said:
Nice edit.

I <3

Yeah, I realized after I posted, that what you said wasn't all that funny....just mildly amusing.

timeless2 · Jul 14, 2006

Gearbanger 101 said:
Yeah, I realized after I posted, that what you said wasn't all that funny....just mildly amusing.

On topic:
I wish I had a 5.0 in my Mustang...

The 5.0L DOHC 4-valve “Cammer” engine is an upgraded variant of the 4.6L DOHC 4-valve Mustang Cobra engine, with numerous changes for improved power and durability. This engine is completely electronically managed. As part of the “Cammer” crate engine program, a stand-alone harness and engine management computer will be available separately. This will allow the engine to be used for many applications.

With proper headers (not included) and low restriction air intake and vehicle exhaust systems, the engine will exceed 400 Bhp and have a very broad torque curve, peaking over 365 ft./lbs.

Among the many features of the 5.0L Cammer are:
* Variable geometry long/short runner, magnesium intake manifold assembly
* All new Ford Racing 356 alloy aluminum block, specifically designed for this 5.0L engine program
* Ford Racing high-flow cylinder heads
* Ford Racing 12mm lift camshafts with unique valves, springs and rocker arms
* High-strength racing connecting rods
* Forged pistons with 11:1 compression ratio (nominal)
* Complete with power steering pump, alternator and air conditioning compressor
* Photo and specs may vary

This assembly is basically a complete package of all the high-performance modular DOHC 4-valve components being offered in the Ford Racing Performance Parts Catalog. These parts are currently in use as the core for a number of widely varying race engine applications. Modular 4.6L and 5.0L DOHC 4-valve engines have been successfully used in drag racing, circle track and road racing. Further component development takes place on a continuous basis at Ford Racing, and will result in ever expanding parts availability for this engine family.

Gearbanger 101 · Jul 14, 2006

I just wish I had an engine in mine (Cougar). Its currently sitting on the floor in my garage in pieces, waiting for me to put the newly balanced crank back in it.

helty · Jul 14, 2006

you know the updated/race version (if thats what you wanna call it) used in the FR500C is actually putting out quite a bit more than the original Cammer. I think the official numbers are undisclosed, last time I went looking for them anyway. The FR500C won the 05 Grand Am Cup Championship.

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/articles/article_00631.shtml

CanadaStang · Jul 14, 2006

Strype said:
You can't just say a "5.0"!!!

The convertibles weighed in at around 3400-3500lbs I beleive...

The hatches all weighed in around 3300-3400lbs I beleive...

The NOTCH weighed in around 2900lbs

You guys are comparing apples and oranges. My coupe, BONE STOCK except for exhaust and a K&N ran a 9.0 in the 1/8 with street strip tires. My old Convertible I had ran a 9.5 at best with headers/exhaust/3.55's and no street strip radials.

The notches will run an LT1 down in stock fashion because they weigh nothing.

I'll get my buddys to drive my 01 GT at the track, against my still stock 93 Notch and settle it once and for all

PS: I own page 3

I listed the weights of all my 5.0's in an earlier post but I've never owned a vert so I can't say for sure. As I also listed earlier my notch wasn't much lighter than my 98' GT [about 180-200lbs, think of it as two cars weighting the same only one has a passanger] Also running 9.0 sec 1/8th miles was no biggy it's just after that 1/8th mile is where they fade off and a well kept LT1 will walk all over the notch back in the 2nd half of the 1/4 mile, as will a 99'-up GT.

Gearbanger 101 · Jul 14, 2006

Don't forget, the '94-'95's were down a few horsepower over the '87-'93's too.

d98gt · Jul 14, 2006

I was just about to ask that. Didn't they drop down 10 horsepower (to 215?)

Gearbanger 101 · Jul 14, 2006

Yeah, the '94-'95's had to use the lower profile and some what more restrictive T-Bird intake to clear the new (at the time) SN95 hood line. That, combined with a slightly less aggressive ECM tune softened the horsepower a little. Add the extra weight of the beefier build SN95 body to that mix and it's easy to see why the earlier foxes were a couple of tenths quicker.

CanadaStang · Jul 14, 2006

Gearbanger 101 said:
Don't forget, the '94-'95's were down a few horsepower over the '87-'93's too.

If I remember correctly, Ford said they revised the way they calculated Hp figures in 93', so even though it was the same engine, same output, the hp figures were 10 less than before.

Edit: I could be wrong though, I'll do some research......

Gearbanger 101 · Jul 14, 2006

CanadaStang said:
If I remember correctly, Ford said they revised the way they calculated Hp figures in 93', so even though it was the same engine, same output, the hp figures were 10 less than before.

I think that was only for the '93 model year they used that rating system. After all was said and done, they had rated the '93 Mustang (which was of the same essential configuration as it had been for the last 6-years) at 205hp that year. In ’94 they went back to the old method of rating which brought the SN95 back up to 215hp….even after the intake and ECM changes.

Ratings have little to do with actual output in some cases though. It's common knowledge amongst the 5.0L crowd that the '87-'88 “Speed Density” Mustang were the fastest and most powerful of the '87-'92 Fox era, yet all were rated at 225hp/300lbs ft from Ford.

Strype · Jul 14, 2006

Yep... 87-88 were true 225hp... after that was 215-220 no matter the rating.

will a stock 5.0 beat a stock 4.6?

I'd donkey punch my sister.

Sponsors (?)

New Member

New Member

Cuthbert catcher

Vi Veri Veni Versum Vicus Vici

Straight Outta Locash

Vi Veri Veni Versum Vicus Vici

Straight Outta Locash

Vi Veri Veni Versum Vicus Vici

Attachments

Straight Outta Locash

some Ukrainian's enjoying a handjob via my credit

New Member

Straight Outta Locash

Straight Outta Locash

New Member

Straight Outta Locash

Cuthbert catcher

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency