will a stock 5.0 beat a stock 4.6?

Gearbanger 101 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Ah Ok, I wasn't aware of that. I, for some reason, was thinking that the revised Hp figure was 205Hp and then they bumped it to 215Hp for 94', but ya car companies have been playing with the advertised Hp numbers for years.

Strype said:

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

Click to expand...

My 87', 89' and the 91' all ran roughly the same mph and time in the 1/4, with the 91' being slightly faster than the others. I never dyno'd the 89' but I did have the other two on the dyno [87' and the 91'] [same dyno but not the same day] and both put down in the 190's, I can't remember the exact hp figures as I'm at work but I'll check it out when I get home.

OKAY. Enough, civil war is'nt going to help. Most of us like to have an opinion, and, we're entitled to one. Lets be reasonable with one another and appreciate the points being made. I think everyone has made a good point. But, it comes down to this. I'm sorry to say to you 5.0 owners, ME BEING ONE OF THEM, the 99+ is gonna take down the fastest 5.0, the notch, probably by about 1-4 tenths. Trap speed, well, it depends how important it is to you, if you're in the process of building your car, then it matters more I guess, but, the 99+ produce a better trap noboby here will dare argue that point.

It's simple, the 99+ just pulls harder above 3krpm. All the work they did between the 98 and 99 4.6 was directed at the high rpm performance, and, anyone who knows the 4.6 knows, that below 3k rpm, there's really no difference between a 96GT and a 2004GT, but above 3krpm, it's [all the difference in the world].

Now days the 5.0's are rappin up miles and time, however, that cant be said for all, alot of owners keep them in tip top, and many have rebuilds etc etc, so none of us can really use age as an excuse, it comes down to every car being unique.

It's not even a big deal, but I know for a fact stock for stock, brand new, even with a time machine, go back and grab a 87 Notch (I prefer 87 as the best year of 5.0) and line it up with a brand new 99+ GT Coupe, you know which one is faster.

The only reason there's even any debate in here, IMO, is because some people just like to be heard, and they should be, we're all entitled to an opinion. I just dont get it tho, it should be common knowledge that the 99+ is quicker, I mean, it's not that big of a deal. The 5.0 is king, so what if it's a few tenths slower.

Note: Every 5.0 i've had has had issues in the top end, i'd always wanted more top end pull. When I bought my 99 Limited, with 100k on the clock, it was like a dream come true, finally some goddamn pull on the high end!!!!


I want to be an official member

:SNSign:

The better q here is there really any stock 5.0's barely and the ones that are are grauge queen show cars

LB0193 said:

The better q here is there really any stock 5.0's barely and the ones that are are grauge queen show cars

Click to expand...

Ya some of them have had pretty hard lives, but there are a few out there that are pretty nice. My 91' LX has just under 29,000 miles [bought it from my uncle 10 years ago with 6000 miles on it] and has always had a soft life. My uncle always kept in the garage and so have I, so it still looks new.
Edit: Oh, the only mods it has is an off-road H-pipe and the air silencer removed.

I owned a 91 LX coupe, 95 and 96 Cobra, '04 Mach 1 (like a fool traded it in so my wife could get an Expedition), and now a 01 GT. By far the fastest bone stock N/A I've owned is the Mach 1. The best gear option you could get with a 5.0 was a 3.08 and even with it the engine was not the quickest out of the hole. Even with the roughly 4-500 lbs. weight increase over a 5.0 coupe, I have to give the nod to the 99-. Now if two equal drivers were given only a $1,000 to spend on mod's on their cars, I would take the 5.0 because that money will go alot further.

i owned an 80 that weighed 2700lbs stripped for racing.

an 83 notch weighed around 2500 race stripped.

i've driven countless stangs of most years. a typical 5 speed notch runs 9.4 here. that's a fast one. totally stock. most 99+ run about the same maybe 9.3. but essentially the same.

225hp and 2900 = 12.88 lb/hp
260hp and 3300 = 12.69 lb/hp

stripped notch 2500lbs
stripped sn.....3000lbs

hard to beat weight. same reason LS f-bodies a hard to beat. lighter than me.

timeless2 said:

In the 4.6 forum? No.
In the 5.0 forum? Yes.

Click to expand...