Search



Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Racing Boards > Theoretical and Street Racing
Register Forgot Password?

Theoretical and Street Racing Use this board to ask questions about street racing, discuss your street races, and "who would win?" questions. Keep it safe.

Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-10-2009, 09:40 PM   #51
Member
 
BlueIroc-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: WA
Posts: 320
Car: 1989 Camaro Iroc-Z
Engine: 305 TPI (LB9)
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 2.77 posi

Classifieds Rating: (6)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by RicksIroc86 View Post
i think the vast majority of 305 camaros arent rated at 230. i think most are the ones rated at 190. i could be wrong though
You're right, the 230 number is from the dual cat 5sp LB9, which probably did not constitute the majority of 305 TPIs. But, it's what they used to compare to the Mustang in that article, and that's where I've been getting a lot of my numbers.

The dual-cat 5sp LB9 was rated at 230hp 300tq, while the auto single cat was anywhere from 190-215hp depending on what year you look at.
BlueIroc-Z is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 10:03 PM   #52
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northern CT
Posts: 2,266
Car: 1986 Trans am
Engine: 5.3 LM7
Transmission: T56 6 speed
Axle/Gears: Dana 44 w/ 3.55's

Classifieds Rating: (8)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 25thmustang View Post
I made 272/316 to the tire years ago with unported stock heads, a stock cam, a Cobra intake and bolt ons.

Brothers GT40P car was in the 290 rwhp range with a stock cam, unported Explorer heads and a Cobra Intake.

Hopefully shortly his motor will have better valve train, cam and some LTs. I would hope it sees 300+ to the tire.

Were your cars on a dyno jet by any chance?....that sounds kind of high for a stock cam and unported heads, and I know dyno jets read rediculously high and are not very accurate. I've seen freinds dyno at 270-280rwhp with GT40 heads and bigger cams/ headers exhaust, etc.

Ford's 5.0 is a good motor, no doubt. I just love cubes for a street motor!

By the way, I know you from back in the UEP days haha....been a LOOOOONG time.
__________________
1986 Trans Am, 2005 5.3, 317 heads, LS6 intake, LS6 cam and valve springs, Turbonetics T76 turbo, viper spec T56 transmission, BMR everything
whitedevilTA is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2009, 09:51 AM   #53
Supreme Member
 
25thmustang's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: CT
Posts: 2,839
Car: Mustang
Engine: Bolt Ons
Transmission: Stock
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Yes Dyno Jet, and they might read higher, but the track numbers really do back the power numbers up. Granted my last dyno was a weak 256, but it did go 12.53 @ 108. Brothers 290 rwhp GT40P car has been 12.17 @ 111. Dads only made mid 400 to the tire (Mustang Dyno) but went 9.93 @ 136.

I do remember you, didn't you have a Firebird WS6 for a while? Been a long time since I have been on that website...
__________________
1989 Mustang LX 5.0: Stock Unported heads (larger valves), stock cam, Cobra intake, exhaust, 4.10s.
Slicks: 12.56 @ 107.2
17" ET Streets: 12.53 @ 108.3
17" DRs: 12.87 @ 111.5
18" Street Tires: 12.95 @ 109.2
25thmustang is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2009, 12:01 PM   #54
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northern CT
Posts: 2,266
Car: 1986 Trans am
Engine: 5.3 LM7
Transmission: T56 6 speed
Axle/Gears: Dana 44 w/ 3.55's

Classifieds Rating: (8)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Yea, I had a black Firehawk. I havn't been on that site in a long time either. Should have kept that car too, haha! A freind of mine has a 240sx that made 287rwhp and he runs 12.5's at 117 because he can't hook, but it goes to show that weight makes a huge difference. I'd need low to mid 300's to run that in an F-body.
__________________
1986 Trans Am, 2005 5.3, 317 heads, LS6 intake, LS6 cam and valve springs, Turbonetics T76 turbo, viper spec T56 transmission, BMR everything
whitedevilTA is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2009, 03:09 PM   #55
Supreme Member
 
25thmustang's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: CT
Posts: 2,839
Car: Mustang
Engine: Bolt Ons
Transmission: Stock
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Thats where the fox bodies come in handy. Easy to get 3100-3300 lbs with a 200 lb driver. Shed some weight and a lot of them have seen sub 3000 lbs with driver. Weight is nice to not have in a car!
__________________
1989 Mustang LX 5.0: Stock Unported heads (larger valves), stock cam, Cobra intake, exhaust, 4.10s.
Slicks: 12.56 @ 107.2
17" ET Streets: 12.53 @ 108.3
17" DRs: 12.87 @ 111.5
18" Street Tires: 12.95 @ 109.2
25thmustang is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2009, 09:47 AM   #56
Member
 
danziger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 480
Car: 1991 Formula Firebird
Engine: L98 with headers/exhaust
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 10-bolt

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

I've had a couple of both, so I'll throw in my $.02 worth.

If you take the fastest example of both platforms, which would be a stripper 3.08 LX notch versus a lightly-optioned 3.23 L98 Formula or IROC, my money is on the 302 by a hair. A fully-loaded AOD GT versus a pork-laden L98 GTA and my money is on the 350.

I bought my first Fox (loaded 1989 GT 5-speed) stock with 70K miles and it ran a horrible 15.2 at Atco. However, with shorties/exhaust, pullies, clutch, CAI and 3.55s it ran almost a full second quicker. It eventually went 12.9 with a very mild heads/cam/intake combo and stickes. Fox 5.0s will run...period.

My 1992 GT 5-speed was purely a mild bolt-on car, but still ran well.

I really do like the Foxes and may buy another, but GMs just push my buttons better. Both my Formulas also run/ran well for what they are and I'd say their 350/700R4 combo would give a stockish 302/M5 a good race...

Here's my 1992 GT with my 650ish rwhp Z28:
Click the image to open in full size.

Here's my 1991 L98 Formy with my cammed Z06:
Click the image to open in full size.
danziger is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2009, 02:54 PM   #57
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Griffin,GA
Posts: 115
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: 305 TBI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

i know this is little different,but i wanna say something in to help the hated L03 agrument.

my friend has a 97 low mile 3200 pound 5sp GT,pretty much stock...it ran a 14.5 at the track.

well i have a L03 with exhaust/3.23/and weighed 3200 pounds.


well from a 15 roll,i pulled on him at the start,then we stayed even till bout 70-80 then he pulled a car on me.

so the L03 doesnt do to bad for a emissions motor.
__________________
HypnoToad is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 07:33 PM   #58
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: ct
Posts: 44
Car: 86 camaro irocz z28
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

0-60 with a 350 iroc and a 5.0 will be side by side all day. but the iroc will pull ahead in the 1/4......still closely matched
jmmass is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2009, 04:11 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: califorina
Posts: 266
Car: 1989 i roc-z28
Engine: 350 tpi l98
Transmission: 700r4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmmass View Post
0-60 with a 350 iroc and a 5.0 will be side by side all day. but the iroc will pull ahead in the 1/4......still closely matched
from my personal experiences with 5.0 mustangs it seems like a l98 will get a good jump off the line , and the mustang will start to walk the camaro it down roughly in the 80-100mph range. this was manly due to the tpi running out of breath up top

just my .02 cents
chevy boi is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 12:22 PM   #60
Member
 
danziger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 480
Car: 1991 Formula Firebird
Engine: L98 with headers/exhaust
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 10-bolt

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by HypnoToad View Post
my friend has a 97 low mile 3200 pound 5sp GT,pretty much stock...it ran a 14.5 at the track.
The only problems is that 1997 GTs have the non-PI 4.6, not a 5.0/302.
danziger is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 06:14 PM   #61
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Griffin,GA
Posts: 115
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: 305 TBI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

well i was just saying that,my exhaust only L03 hung with one....so i dont see how a 350 would have any problem with stock 302
__________________
HypnoToad is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 07:02 PM   #62
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by HypnoToad View Post
well i was just saying that,my exhaust only L03 hung with one....so i dont see how a 350 would have any problem with stock 302
Well an l03 car is a high 15, low 16 second car from my experience. Where as an 87-92 mustang gt/lx is a soild mid 14 second car... Inconclusion a 5.0 should OWN an l03 allllll dayy.
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 10:18 PM   #63
Junior Member
 
s10irocspikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucester Co. N.J.
Posts: 98
Car: 86 IROC
Engine: 350 Miniram
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Man, this thread went everywhere! Even down to block sizing??? By the way, congrats on the stang buy. You're gonna love how that car actually responds to bolt-ons. If it's fast. I likey!

In the EFI performance department, Stang does own. Wanna know why?

-TPI, and TBI are a joke when it comes to actual performance. GM should have left those setups in a pickup truck for TORQUE. We all know this and are in denial and will refuse to admit it. A carbed 305, 5sp. would have been a solid competitor to the 86-92 stangs any day on the street.

FACT: You can easily run mid 12's in a N/A stang and NOT touch the PROM. Try that in a TPI. Go ahead, slap on that HSR. You still won't benefit without spending hours behind a computer to get it to run right. Meanwile the guy in the fox body is driving around having fun racing, AND he's using the extra money YOU spent on software and/or dyno tuning to buy more bolt-on fun.

I've never owned a fox body but i've been around enough of them to know what i'm talking about. All my friends who loved cars drove fox bodies and newer. I've raced against tons of fox body stangs and others in the streets of Philly (61st St., Holstein, Front, 11th, Darien, Automall/Essington, Pattison, Columbus/Delaware, Enterprise). I've even driven fox bodies for friends at races. And i'll admit, it was sweet to race a car that pulled to the sky and had an evil scream to it. I just wouldn't trust any of the gauges nor would I go around a turn faster then 10mph in one.

In conclusion, The fox body had a better EFI setup. And the fox body had a better aftermarket following because of that fuel injection. Those 2 items were THE main reason the stangs were faster, more enjoyable on the street and more rewarding after modifying.

Third gens had a 350 that was strangled by a poorly designed "performance" EFI. We all know what happened when GM did design a performance EFI setup. It rained hell and vengence on anything that pulled up next to it. If only you could reach the back half of the motor easier on that car....

In all honesty, I love my car. I just wish I didn't spend over a thousand dollars to make my EFI go fast when I could have been there in 1/4 of the time and 1/3 of the price carbed.
__________________
1986 IROC, 350, T-5, Zoom clutch, 16lb flywheel, homemade cold air, gutted MAS, BBK 52mm TB, TPIS Miniram, 30lb Motorsport injectors, AFR heads, Crane cam, Crane 1.6 rockers, SLP 1 3/4 headers, Flowmaster cat back, 3.73's, NOS/Compucar nitrous kit, LSRacing chip, 18" IROC's
s10irocspikes is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 11:44 PM   #64
Member
 
aciddrop2804's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cincinnati ohio
Posts: 231
Car: 1984 camaro Z28
Engine: 5.0L H.O. L69
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by STRIKER911 View Post
Short headers where stock on mustangs. My 86 gt had them, so did a few other parts cars. Mustangs where just built to go faster. The Camaro seemed to be better looking yes, but racers care very little about looks, so what does that tell you?

I looked up the history on both and you would think that the 305 being bigger would be faster, but my 89 would have had to go back to 1983 to beat a mustang in stock form. Pretty sad. I would never trade my Camaro for a stang, but I would still love to have another one. They are for sure smaller, but I wonder how much lighter too?

I was very disapointed in the performance of my Camaro. So much so, that I drive it very little.
Well i know this is from a little while ago but i figured I would comment on it anyways. Of coarse your camaro is going to be slower! you have the worst v-8 ever put in a 3rd gen! go get yourself a 305 IROC and put 3.73 gears in it and i'm sure you won't be dissapointed with that.
aciddrop2804 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 12:05 AM   #65
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northern CT
Posts: 2,266
Car: 1986 Trans am
Engine: 5.3 LM7
Transmission: T56 6 speed
Axle/Gears: Dana 44 w/ 3.55's

Classifieds Rating: (8)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

You had the crap model camaro....gotta buy the good one to compete with mustangs.....here ya go, the vid doesn't lie. This is the G92 230HP 305 5 speed...enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7GJUMB8wa0
__________________
1986 Trans Am, 2005 5.3, 317 heads, LS6 intake, LS6 cam and valve springs, Turbonetics T76 turbo, viper spec T56 transmission, BMR everything
whitedevilTA is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 12:19 AM   #66
Senior Member
 
STRIKER911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Independence Mo
Posts: 561
Car: 89 RS
Engine: 305 TBI (lo3)
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: Whatever is stock.

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by s10irocspikes View Post

In all honesty, I love my car. I just wish I didn't spend over a thousand dollars to make my EFI go fast when I could have been there in 1/4 of the time and 1/3 of the price carbed.
couldnt agree with you more about 99% of this stuff, & its a great way to put the Slowmaro in its place. So. I have been working on my car that came with rebuilt motor and trans, for the last 3 years little by little. Well the time was near to start screwing the motor for more power, and along came all the bs you speak of (that I wish I had known about before i got the car). I mean dang! I have a car that wont even shift into high gear before the limiter kicks in with my foot in it yet is in high gear at 30mph crusing? Talk about a junk set up.

So heres my solution, & it fits in real good for this topic. How about if I just sell the Camaro, & let my dad give me my old mustang back? The stang was an 86, was EFI, Has near new interior, New paint, & a heck of a better part list. Things like
Possi 373.
new hi po heads, with roller rockers.
Cam from hell.
Headers, Off road h pipe, with flowmasters.
New clutch
Pro 5.0 shifter
Also converted to the 87-92 body, ground effects ect

Well I did it. I let my dad trade me his car, for a $1100 john deere riding lawn mower. Used but has only 15 hrs on it.
what a deal! I love the mustang. Thing hooks up real good and just leaves so fast. I have a new love.

Camaro is for sale if your local to kc Mo. But all the work I put in the darn thing i wont let it go for cheap wont get into price till I post it. Will say no less then 4kill add pics here of the stang and have lots of the camaro too. i have not taken any pics of the stang myself but just grabed what i have here off my dads myspace.

Just think about the money I just saved, & wow what a jump I will have. I dont really think much else should be done to the car. He did take the whole alpine system for his boat.

I am still having a hard time seeing why my dad would have done this. I mean its for sure a cool thing to do but hes not rich. makes like 18 an hour. I know he put his heart and soul in this car. I loved it when I had it before it was stolen and screwed to hell. It was still the 86 style ( I liked 86 look better since it wasnt seen all over like the 87-93), had chrome cobra r's, & the only hop ups then where the exahust. My dad pretty much made this car. The aholes that stold it wrecked it and left it for dead with a knocking motor.

I had 8k in it back then in its ugly state, and just couldnt stand to look at it. So I gave it to him for his bday since I could tell he wanted it more then I did.

I have pictures of before it was stolen, after, and now. It was in bad shape. The date is wrong in the pics. Had to have been this summer since I helped him move to that house in jan of this year.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg l_4acc029e7b5a437d853d1035d27fb07f.jpg (44.6 KB, 44 views)
File Type: jpg l_2321334dc7004a27bec0f92a0c0313cb.jpg (48.0 KB, 31 views)
File Type: jpg l_4d451087d5964249834fe3b26fdcf42c.jpg (49.6 KB, 26 views)

Last edited by STRIKER911; 09-18-2009 at 12:26 AM. Reason: picture trouble
STRIKER911 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 12:26 AM   #67
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northern CT
Posts: 2,266
Car: 1986 Trans am
Engine: 5.3 LM7
Transmission: T56 6 speed
Axle/Gears: Dana 44 w/ 3.55's

Classifieds Rating: (8)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by STRIKER911 View Post
I have pictures of before it was stolen, after, and now. It was in bad shape.
Nice car! I have freinds with fox bodies, and they are very respectable cars for being from the 80's. I was just always a GM fanboy.

By the way, that interior is HIDEOUS!!! I MUCH prefer the newer style thats in my buddy's 93 notch, and the ones in the camaros and TA's is also a lot nicer to me.
__________________
1986 Trans Am, 2005 5.3, 317 heads, LS6 intake, LS6 cam and valve springs, Turbonetics T76 turbo, viper spec T56 transmission, BMR everything
whitedevilTA is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 12:37 AM   #68
Senior Member
 
STRIKER911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Independence Mo
Posts: 561
Car: 89 RS
Engine: 305 TBI (lo3)
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: Whatever is stock.

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by whitedevilTA View Post
Nice car! I have freinds with fox bodies, and they are very respectable cars for being from the 80's. I was just always a GM fanboy.

By the way, that interior is HIDEOUS!!! I MUCH prefer the newer style thats in my buddy's 93 notch, and the ones in the camaros and TA's is also a lot nicer to me.
Thanks. & the dash does suck but oh well. Sure makes up for it. I loved gm also since (age 9) I was changing oil in my parents 77 shortbed Scottsdale that dad swapped a 400 in. That truck started it all for me. Heck when I bought the mustang it was my second choice. I missed the camaro I wanted then by 3 hours. Im glad I ended up with the stang though. I may keep both. I love the looks of the camaro. Maybe I can just keep that for show and the stang for show and go? sounds stupid but I love my camaro. I look at it and its like a girl I want to undress; the feeling is second to none. till I drive it lol.
STRIKER911 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 07:29 AM   #69
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northern CT
Posts: 2,266
Car: 1986 Trans am
Engine: 5.3 LM7
Transmission: T56 6 speed
Axle/Gears: Dana 44 w/ 3.55's

Classifieds Rating: (8)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Yea, it's a tough choice....mustangs are nice cars and I personally like the looks of certain ones...(I even own one ----08 shelby GT) But it's whatever you like. F bodies handled much better from the factory but stangs were easier to make fast. It's a trade off you have to make. I am glad I ended up with my TA because while I love my daily driver mustang, nothing can replace my 86 trans am.
__________________
1986 Trans Am, 2005 5.3, 317 heads, LS6 intake, LS6 cam and valve springs, Turbonetics T76 turbo, viper spec T56 transmission, BMR everything
whitedevilTA is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 06:57 PM   #70
Senior Member
 
STRIKER911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Independence Mo
Posts: 561
Car: 89 RS
Engine: 305 TBI (lo3)
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: Whatever is stock.

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by whitedevilTA View Post
Yea, it's a tough choice....mustangs are nice cars and I personally like the looks of certain ones...(I even own one ----08 shelby GT) But it's whatever you like. F bodies handled much better from the factory but stangs were easier to make fast. It's a trade off you have to make. I am glad I ended up with my TA because while I love my daily driver mustang, nothing can replace my 86 trans am.
Ya. Ur TA is a nice looking car. Had a 5 speed LT-1 355 GTA for about a month. Bought it from a dealer that had the motor rebuilt. Darn car was sweet, but Just didnt end up being the car for me. What kind of person puts a motor in a car with a worn clutch anyways? A dealer. So ya about 2 weeks into the deal I had a burnt clutch, so I took it back. I have kicked myself many times over for that. Was a rare car. Had the digital dash too. Plus the coolant hose was not put on right and burnt the t-stat, & some darn dog ran out n front of me too. tried to stop, but just hit the dog and all kinds of paint was chipe off the front. God I was so mad. Got out of the car in the middle of the street, & yelled "you mother f "er I hope u die"! Too much bs in three weeks lol.
STRIKER911 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 10:40 PM   #71
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northern CT
Posts: 2,266
Car: 1986 Trans am
Engine: 5.3 LM7
Transmission: T56 6 speed
Axle/Gears: Dana 44 w/ 3.55's

Classifieds Rating: (8)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by STRIKER911 View Post
Ya. Ur TA is a nice looking car. Had a 5 speed LT-1 355 GTA for about a month. Bought it from a dealer that had the motor rebuilt. Darn car was sweet, but Just didnt end up being the car for me. What kind of person puts a motor in a car with a worn clutch anyways? A dealer. So ya about 2 weeks into the deal I had a burnt clutch, so I took it back. I have kicked myself many times over for that. Was a rare car. Had the digital dash too. Plus the coolant hose was not put on right and burnt the t-stat, & some darn dog ran out n front of me too. tried to stop, but just hit the dog and all kinds of paint was chipe off the front. God I was so mad. Got out of the car in the middle of the street, & yelled "you mother f "er I hope u die"! Too much bs in three weeks lol.

Thanks for the compliment! And I'm cracking my *** off after that comment. "you mother f "er I hope you die" Hahahaha, who cares about the damn dog, look at my car!!!!! LOL, I'd be the same way.
__________________
1986 Trans Am, 2005 5.3, 317 heads, LS6 intake, LS6 cam and valve springs, Turbonetics T76 turbo, viper spec T56 transmission, BMR everything
whitedevilTA is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2009, 04:02 AM   #72
Member
 
danziger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 480
Car: 1991 Formula Firebird
Engine: L98 with headers/exhaust
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 10-bolt

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by HypnoToad View Post
well i was just saying that,my exhaust only L03 hung with one....so i dont see how a 350 would have any problem with stock 302
I understand what you're saying, but it really is an apples to oranges comparison. The 4.6 in the 1997 GT you raced is regarded as the worst performer of modern Mustang V8s. It is inferior to the 302 in most every way. Not to mention that the SN95 body (1994-98) is a couple hundered pounds heavier than a comparable Fox-body.
danziger is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 11:39 PM   #73
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

The f body is an understatement, try thinking to your if GM didnt make our cars to freakin heavy compared to the fox. Think about if the camaro or firebird if you will being the same weight as the fox, it will stomp all over the mustang, but also think, with all the torque you will be spinning tires for ever. And really as far as the fox having the advantage, its also something i think is , my friend has 2 fox stangs, 88 gt, and a 91, and i beat them stock, he just has exhaust on them.

I guess the point im getting at is, that if you know how to time the right speed right, and launch, without spinning the tires to death, you can out beat the mustang, trust me, ive done it. And i have a stock 350 TPI. You just have to know how to control your car.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2009, 11:58 PM   #74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Madison, SD
Posts: 569
Car: '82 Camaro
Engine: 383
Transmission: TKO 5 speed
Axle/Gears: 31 spline 9" with 4.56:1

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

I've owned, built, and raced Camaro's and Mustangs (and mumerous others) over the years, even started out in Mopars... all have their good and bad points. The Chevy Vs Ford argument has been going on since the Stovebolts and Flatties used to go at it and will continue to do so when we're all running our hydrogen and battery powered cars....

I see lots of comparisons of the 5.0 Ford to a 350 Chevy... If it's apples to apples then wouldn't it be a side by side comparison of a 5.0 to a 305?????

Theoreticals and I have a buddy with a _____ comparisons mean very little. Just build what you like and take it to the track where BS walks and horsepower talks.... As for me, I can go fast in either, just kind of depends on how the mood strikes me....

Performance has little to do with which car (Mustang or Camaro) you buy, it's what you do with it when you get it home that makes it go fast!!!!!
__________________
Of course it's for sale!!! Everything is for sale!!!!

Camaro and other projects pictures can be seen at:

http://s534.photobucket.com/albums/e...1982%20Camaro/
radical82 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 12:16 AM   #75
Senior Member
 
STRIKER911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Independence Mo
Posts: 561
Car: 89 RS
Engine: 305 TBI (lo3)
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: Whatever is stock.

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1989formulakid View Post

I guess the point im getting at is, that if you know how to time the right speed right, and launch, without spinning the tires to death, you can out beat the mustang, trust me, ive done it. And i have a stock 350 TPI. You just have to know how to control your car.
May not be directed at me just thought it would be fun to add, that my lo3 has no problem hooking no matter how hard you launch lmao. Oh she hooks!
STRIKER911 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 03:56 AM   #76
Supreme Member
 
Street Lethal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,300
Car: 1990 GTA
Engine: 5.0L Turbo V8
Transmission: 700R4

Classifieds Rating: (12)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by laiky
The point is if the TPI motor could rev, it would be an even match.
Agreed. Siamesing the intake w/runners will correct that problem though. Give an engine, any engine, what it wants, and it will respond accordingly. The 305-TPI is so restrictive from the factory, that I can't believe it's even being used as a comparison in this thread. The heads are garbage, the cam is garbage, the exhaust is garbage, and the TPI is way too restrictive. However, w/the 305, if we siamese the intake w/runners, give the engine what it wants in terms of fuel, air, and spark, and follow this build from the engine masters, it becomes a totally different story....;

"The small bore is an immediate red flag to most guys; but is it really when things are looked at in proportion to the engine's size? In fact, the factory 305 bore/stoke ratio is actually slightly better than a stock 454 Chevy, and way better than any of the 4.030x4.000-inch strokers. Conjuring the Power Pack Actually, with the right heads, there is nothing inherent in the bore to stroke ratio of an engine of this displacement that will cripple cylinder filling, especially in the street rpm range of under 6,500 rpm. We had just the heads in mind for this project, the 180cc intake runner EngineQuest (EQ) replacement Vortec castings. These heads are machined for 1.94/1.50-inch valves, which are proportionally large for a 305-cube engine, and their low cost makes them a natural for a budget conscious 305 build. The flow of these castings is a major step up from restrictive stock 305 heads, and we have seen firsthand that they can support excellent output, even on a larger 350-cube engine. On a 305 engine, their 233-cfm of intake flow, if taken in proportion, would be the equivalent of running a 290-plus-cfm head on a 383 small-block combination. Our 305 should be more than happy with the flow these heads provide"....

"What would the 305 make? We had plenty of time for conjecture while the engine was being run for the cam break-in cycle. Even though the stock 305 had show better output than most of the detractors had anticipated, there was little confidence in the 305's potential. Jawboning in the cell predicted numbers in the low 300hp range. There were a few surprised expressions when the 305 cranked 367 hp at 6,000 rpm on the first pull. With some fine-tuning of the air/fuel ratio via a jet change to the Speed Demon carb, power inched up to 372 hp at 6,100 rpm. That's credible power for any street small-block; enough to make a Third Gen Camaro really scoot. Had we started with a higher compression hydraulic roller 305, as is typical of the later F-bodies, there likely would have been even a little more. The lesson here is that any engine can be made to perform with the right combination of parts, even those that the vast majority of people are reluctant to love"....

- Engine Masters

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...e_testing.html
Street Lethal is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:10 AM   #77
Member
 
aciddrop2804's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cincinnati ohio
Posts: 231
Car: 1984 camaro Z28
Engine: 5.0L H.O. L69
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

that engine they built puked a rod...they can't handle a lot of power very well...
__________________
1984 z28 5.0 L69 H.O. T5 tranny with 3.73 gears and posi trac.

upgrades-
B&M short shifter
aciddrop2804 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:30 AM   #78
Supreme Member
 
Street Lethal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 7,300
Car: 1990 GTA
Engine: 5.0L Turbo V8
Transmission: 700R4

Classifieds Rating: (12)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by aciddrop2804
that engine they built puked a rod...they can't handle a lot of power very well....
Your talking about a rod though, there are way too many variables (iffy tune, how parts were installed, etc.) to be blaming the 305 block itself because of that, not to mention 350's and up doing the very same thing at times. For you to say that they can't handle a lot of power very well would mean that you've seen the majority of 305's blow up in your lifetime. The Buick guys that I know blow their 3.8 109 blocks much more frequently, but again we're talking rods and pistons. Does that mean that the block can't handle the 600-HP being thrown at them? Not at all, because it's the rolling assembly, and state of tune, that is subject to question....
Street Lethal is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 12:27 PM   #79
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by STRIKER911 View Post
May not be directed at me just thought it would be fun to add, that my lo3 has no problem hooking no matter how hard you launch lmao. Oh she hooks!
i wasnt referring to anyone really lol, i was just stating if you know how to handle the car the right way you can outbeat the mustang. The lo3 doesnt have the torque as the TPI i was talking about, not saying the lo3 is bad, my old formula wit the 5 speed could spin the tires plenty with the lo3 motor, but the tpi is a different story.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 03:07 PM   #80
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1989formulakid View Post
i wasnt referring to anyone really lol, i was just stating if you know how to handle the car the right way you can outbeat the mustang. The lo3 doesnt have the torque as the TPI i was talking about, not saying the lo3 is bad, my old formula wit the 5 speed could spin the tires plenty with the lo3 motor, but the tpi is a different story.
Ill say the l03 is bad. My friends 91 l03 bird runs low 16's. He has to watch out for damn Hondas. lmao. Tpi is good...if your races are very short, other than than im not a fan of tune port injection at all. Back when I had my full bolt on L98, my friend had a full bolt on 88 gt. I would beat him off the line every time but he would usually catch up alittle bit by the end. From a roll he would edge me out my about 1/2 car. So I guess its safe to say "drivers race".
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 07:12 PM   #81
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Stock form lo3 isnt very good, change the heads, cam, intake, tune, air intake on the tbi itself, then you see a flying lo3 go past you. Lo3 just got a piece of junk cam, and heads stock. Ive seen lo3 motors up to 350 HP and they will blow down the ls1 cars. Blah i didnt have a honda that keep up with my formy, but also having a 5 speed was a different story.

And well yea, the mustang will outbeat you on the long run, because the tpi is going to get slower past 80 because your in a high rpm range when the tpi cant breathe well. But you can still win with the same mods everybody on here says do, runners,intake,heads,cam,tune and you will zip past the mustang. simple bolt ons to these cars doesnt add horsepower, maybe just a couple, but not enough to even notice a difference, they just give you that exhaust sound you want.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 07:40 PM   #82
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Griffin,GA
Posts: 115
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: 305 TBI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by danziger View Post
I understand what you're saying, but it really is an apples to oranges comparison. The 4.6 in the 1997 GT you raced is regarded as the worst performer of modern Mustang V8s. It is inferior to the 302 in most every way. Not to mention that the SN95 body (1994-98) is a couple hundered pounds heavier than a comparable Fox-body.
true they are different,but his car weighed same as mine 3200 pound(it was base as hell GT)5sp car....and ran a 14.7 with clogged air filter on a very hot GA summer day.

point is my 305 with 3.23 gear,air filter and exhaust hung with that car till bout 80.

it was from a 15roll and i jumped on him at the start....

so just saying my crappy L03 ran with a mid 14 sec mustang(like a foxbody)...so no bad imo.
HypnoToad is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 07:49 PM   #83
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1989formulakid View Post
Stock form lo3 isnt very good, change the heads, cam, intake, tune, air intake on the tbi itself, then you see a flying lo3 go past you. Lo3 just got a piece of junk cam, and heads stock. Ive seen lo3 motors up to 350 HP and they will blow down the ls1 cars. Blah i didnt have a honda that keep up with my formy, but also having a 5 speed was a different story.

And well yea, the mustang will outbeat you on the long run, because the tpi is going to get slower past 80 because your in a high rpm range when the tpi cant breathe well. But you can still win with the same mods everybody on here says do, runners,intake,heads,cam,tune and you will zip past the mustang. simple bolt ons to these cars doesnt add horsepower, maybe just a couple, but not enough to even notice a difference, they just give you that exhaust sound you want.
I wouldnt compare an l03 with an ls1 though. An ls1 is a 350-360hp motor from the factory. Even if you can squeeze 350 out of an l03, all the ls1 needs is lid and exhaust to hit 400 fly wheel. Add heads and a cam combo on an ls1 and its game over.
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 09:06 PM   #84
Senior Member
 
cIaRmOaCrZo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: greenfield indiana
Posts: 912
Car: 86' IROC-Z....and 5 other 3rdgens
Engine: 383 hsr
Transmission: built 700r4
Axle/Gears: stock 3.23, 10bolt

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by RicksIroc86 View Post
i think the vast majority of 305 camaros arent rated at 230. i think most are the ones rated at 190. i could be wrong though

the vast majority of the camaros 305's hp rating all depends on the year, and if it is tbi or tpi. the tpi in 85' put out 215 hp, then 86 dropped to 190 hp,,,but more tq. anyways just look at the specs on the THIS website on techboards.
cIaRmOaCrZo is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:24 PM   #85
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Ugh No they weren't. more like 325 max from factory. And lid and exhaust doesnt gain you 75 extra HP, im not trying to debate, im just saying what ive experienced, my buddy has a built ls1 motor, and it only barely got over 400 when he dynoed it. The only reason why i think the lo3 is worth a better build its more cheaper than a tpi, is because if you eliminate the factory restrictions, with aftermarket parts, and ditch the factory breather, you get more power for a cheaper price in the end than building a tpi. 350HP max on a lo3 is the only best results ive seen, theres better alternative fuel injections for exceed 350HP standards than with throttle body injected.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:26 PM   #86
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1989formulakid View Post
Ugh No they weren't. more like 325 max from factory. And lid and exhaust doesnt gain you 75 extra HP, im not trying to debate, im just saying what ive experienced, my buddy has a built ls1 motor, and it only barely got over 400 when he dynoed it. The only reason why i think the lo3 is worth a better build its more cheaper than a tpi, is because if you eliminate the factory restrictions, with aftermarket parts, and ditch the factory breather, you get more power for a cheaper price in the end than building a tpi. 350HP max on a lo3 is the only best results ive seen, theres better alternative fuel injections for exceed 350HP standards than with throttle body injected.
The ls1's were underrated. They dyno around 320 stock. http://www.stangbangers.com/01_Bullitt_Article2.htm

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ure/index.html

If you still dont think so go to ls1.com do some research. I ran 12.8 at 109 with lid and exhaust and dynoed 340rwh. Which is pretty close to 400 FLYWHEEL. 340/.85
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:48 PM   #87
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 1,956
Car: '99 FRC
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42s

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 89IrocZ350TPI View Post
The ls1's were underrated. They dyno around 320 stock. http://www.stangbangers.com/01_Bullitt_Article2.htm

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ure/index.html

If you still dont think so go to ls1.com do some research. I ran 12.8 at 109 with lid and exhaust and dynoed 340rwh. Which is pretty close to 400 FLYWHEEL. 340/.85
most do not dyno around 320rwhp 100% bone stock. most are closer to 300, especially the autos. 295 - 305 at the wheels is the norm

109mph is pretty slow for 340rwhp. my car put down 344rwhp and trapped 116mph. i dont have much faith in dyno numbers... alot of times, the #s at the rollers dont add up to what you run at the track. an actual timed acceleration test is a much better standard for a cars performance than a dyno run
tpivette89 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:51 PM   #88
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by tpivette89 View Post
most do not dyno around 320rwhp 100% bone stock. most are closer to 300, especially the autos. 295 - 305 at the wheels is the norm

109mph is pretty slow for 340rwhp. my car put down 344rwhp and trapped 116mph
True. However my experience is with a 6 speed. Bone stock I dynoed 323 I believe was the exact number. Then 340 with magnaflow cat back, slp lid, k&ns, and a tune. Your probably right about the trap speed. I have a tough time launching the car.
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:54 PM   #89
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Sorry i dont read up the ls1's because i dont like em, its just my opinion, i like the older chevy small blocks, im not fond of the newer ones. Im not trying to bash or be mean im just saying what i like. Thats why i dont read up those sites or talk to 4th gen forums because there not my kind of car i like talking about.

And we are getting wayyyyyyyyy off the topic in this thread.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 10:56 PM   #90
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1989formulakid View Post
Sorry i dont read up the ls1's because i dont like em, its just my opinion, i like the older chevy small blocks, im not fond of the newer ones. Im not trying to bash or be mean im just saying what i like. Thats why i dont read up those sites or talk to 4th gen forums because there not my kind of car i like talking about.

And we are getting wayyyyyyyyy off the topic in this thread.
Haha its all good. I think the topic was decided that its a drivers race between a 5.0 vs L98.
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 11:02 PM   #91
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

It truely is, L98 will always win out of the whole. But any fox mustang will reach its top out speed faster than an l98, but its proven for the l98 to have a higher top out, just takes a tiny bit more time to get there, ive had my l98 on its edge before hitting about 150. No fox mustang stock ive seen has been that high.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 11:15 PM   #92
Supreme Member
 
BigWhiteGTP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,027
Car: 1994 Trans Am
Engine: LT1
Transmission: Auto
Axle/Gears: 3.23

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Why are we talking about LS1s?? We know they are fast and put down great numbers....etc, yadda yadda yadda. We get it. They are unbeatable and undefeated....blah blah blah. We get it. Honestly we do.

Back on subject. A few years back in May 2005, I had a 1991 auto Lb9 single cat Trans Am. It was in good running shape. I had a cutout and it dynoed 187/270tq on a reputed Dyno Jet. That same day a guy with his 89' auto LX stang dynoed and got 176/220tq. I talked to him and a buddy of mine that used to own 5.0s and asked them why his numbers seemed so low and they said that is what autos put down.

In Early Feb 2005, I actually ran the car at the track right after I bought it 2 weeks prior. With the stock 2.73s it ran a shitty 16.2@85 with a even worse 2.5 sixty. Again, not in good running condition at all. Anyway, my bro at the time had his GTP, full exhaust intake and tune, stock pulley though. We did a run later on when my car had an intake and 3.42s and we were dead even. With those mods, his car was doing 14.4s at 94-95.

I've never ridden in or drove a Fox Mustang, although I jump at the chance too.
BigWhiteGTP is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 11:21 PM   #93
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigWhiteGTP View Post
Why are we talking about LS1s?? We know they are fast and put down great numbers....etc, yadda yadda yadda. We get it. They are unbeatable and undefeated....blah blah blah. We get it. Honestly we do.

Back on subject. A few years back in May 2005, I had a 1991 auto Lb9 single cat Trans Am. It was in good running shape. I had a cutout and it dynoed 187/270tq on a reputed Dyno Jet. That same day a guy with his 89' auto LX stang dynoed and got 176/220tq. I talked to him and a buddy of mine that used to own 5.0s and asked them why his numbers seemed so low and they said that is what autos put down.

In Early Feb 2005, I actually ran the car at the track right after I bought it 2 weeks prior. With the stock 2.73s it ran a shitty 16.2@85 with a even worse 2.5 sixty. Again, not in good running condition at all. Anyway, my bro at the time had his GTP, full exhaust intake and tune, stock pulley though. We did a run later on when my car had an intake and 3.42s and we were dead even. With those mods, his car was doing 14.4s at 94-95.

I've never ridden in or drove a Fox Mustang, although I jump at the chance too.
ls3>ls1
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2009, 11:43 PM   #94
Senior Member
 
1989formulakid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: pensacola florida
Posts: 538
Car: 91 Trans Am
Engine: 5.7 350 TPI
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3:23

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Ive drivin a 5.0 fox mustang, i literally hated the steering, braking, and suspension. Brakes felt like they were never going to stop me, and the speed really didnt feel any different from any other car, the rpms just go up while you shift, i literally couldnt feel any torque at all getting on it as to my l98.
1989formulakid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 12:42 AM   #95
Supreme Member
 
89IrocZ350TPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,818
Car: ws6
Engine: ls1
Transmission: m6
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1989formulakid View Post
Ive drivin a 5.0 fox mustang, i literally hated the steering, braking, and suspension. Brakes felt like they were never going to stop me, and the speed really didnt feel any different from any other car, the rpms just go up while you shift, i literally couldnt feel any torque at all getting on it as to my l98.
You have to remember alot of these 20 year old cars are not always in prime condition. When I had my L98 I beat a few 5.0's and lost to a few. Its really a toss up. Both are decent engines, and both have potential.
89IrocZ350TPI is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 03:06 AM   #96
Moderator
 
IROCThe5.7L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 4,901
Car: 1988 IROC-Z
Engine: 427 SBC
Transmission: ProBuilt 700R4
Axle/Gears: Moser 12 Bolt / 3.73 TrueTrac

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Send a message via AIM to IROCThe5.7L
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by s10irocspikes View Post

FACT: You can easily run mid 12's in a N/A stang and NOT touch the PROM. Try that in a TPI. Go ahead, slap on that HSR. You still won't benefit without spending hours behind a computer to get it to run right.

I personally know people that didn't need a tune after installing a HSR. Sure, you probably could get a little more performance with a tune, but a tune was not needed "to make it run right".

I do agree you can run 12's with a stock prom in a 5.0, but I'm sure a tune would help a little. Once you get more in depth than bolt ons, both are going to need a tune anyway. Unless 5.0's have a magic computer I am unaware of.

Last edited by IROCThe5.7L; 10-01-2009 at 03:17 AM.
IROCThe5.7L is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 10:29 AM   #97
Junior Member
 
s10irocspikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucester Co. N.J.
Posts: 98
Car: 86 IROC
Engine: 350 Miniram
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by IROCThe5.7L View Post
I personally know people that didn't need a tune after installing a HSR. Sure, you probably could get a little more performance with a tune, but a tune was not needed "to make it run right".

I do agree you can run 12's with a stock prom in a 5.0, but I'm sure a tune would help a little. Once you get more in depth than bolt ons, both are going to need a tune anyway. Unless 5.0's have a magic computer I am unaware of.
The problem with TPI cars with HSR's is the factory tune is only good for 5000rpms, the maximum of TPI breathability. I have the Miniram and with a chip swap the car was pulling up top where the factory chip ran out.

The "magic" with a fox body is that they have different size mass air meters. When you start making more power to where the stock 19lb injectors are stressed, you buy the 24lb injectors and 70mm mass air meter and you're done. More power? 30lb injectors and 80mm mass air. Don't forget that the stock computer on a fox is good to 6250 rpms, not 5200 and fall on your face.

The greatest part? You're out driving and not playing with a computer to get your car to run right. And if you did do some tune time, i'm sure you could squeeze a few more HP out of a fox.

I have a deep down hatred with TPI. I started out with a 305. I won some and lost alot. Then I swapped in a 350, and a cam. Mid 14's. It wasn't untill I swapped out the intake and TB that I made more power. High 13's and the car ran crappy.

Computer had massive identity probs. No 9th injector so I had to use the fuel side of my nitrous kit to cold start the hooptie. But it ran. Mid 12's on spray with street tires. Threw on a set of AFR's and the car wouldn't run at all.

Tried the mail order chip service. Went back and forth a couple of times to get her running. But still isn't right. Won't run right part throttle (drivability, and too rich on cold start). I still win street races though. Only runs good full out. Haven't been back to the track. Haven't got to use my nitrous (that really pisses me off) for fear of inaccurate fuel delivery.

Found a local TPI tuning service that will tune her for $125 an hour. Like I said earlier, if I went carb'd waaay back when, I'd be 11's easy and a long time ago just like my friends with fuel injected, UNTUNED fox bodies.
s10irocspikes is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 10:42 AM   #98
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 1,956
Car: '99 FRC
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42s

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
I have a deep down hatred with TPI. I started out with a 305. I won some and lost alot. Then I swapped in a 350, and a cam. Mid 14's. It wasn't untill I swapped out the intake and TB that I made more power. High 13's and the car ran crappy.

Computer had massive identity probs. No 9th injector so I had to use the fuel side of my nitrous kit to cold start the hooptie. But it ran. Mid 12's on spray with street tires. Threw on a set of AFR's and the car wouldn't run at all.

Tried the mail order chip service. Went back and forth a couple of times to get her running. But still isn't right. Won't run right part throttle (drivability, and too rich on cold start). I still win street races though. Only runs good full out. Haven't been back to the track. Haven't got to use my nitrous (that really pisses me off) for fear of inaccurate fuel delivery.
your experience was certainly not the norm. 100% stock L98 Fcars cars should be running mid 14s. to turn similar E/Ts with boltons and a cam swap would be embarrassing. there are stock long block C4s that turn mid - high 12s without touching the ECMs or PROMs. thats just with boltons... and the TPI intake up top

a friend of mine had a 305 TPI that only had a cone filter, a catback, and a 125 shot. ran 13.1s at 103mph all day long. no tuning necessary. again, for whatever reason, you only beat that E/T by a measly half second with 45 more cubes, an intake swap, and a bigger cam

it sounds as though your car had other issues that you either werent able to fix or... well... i just dont know. i cant find any other reason for the extreme lack of performance you claim your car had
tpivette89 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 12:25 AM   #99
Moderator
 
IROCThe5.7L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 4,901
Car: 1988 IROC-Z
Engine: 427 SBC
Transmission: ProBuilt 700R4
Axle/Gears: Moser 12 Bolt / 3.73 TrueTrac

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Send a message via AIM to IROCThe5.7L
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Quote:
Originally Posted by s10irocspikes View Post
Threw on a set of AFR's and the car wouldn't run at all.

I agree with tpivette89. There was something you were missing. I put in a cam, HSR, and AFR 195's, and it started no problems. And was drivable with the stock tune. Stock internals with bolt ons, I went 14.0@98 MPH. With 2.77s, stock stall, and a **** poor 60 ft.

Last edited by IROCThe5.7L; 10-02-2009 at 12:44 AM.
IROCThe5.7L is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2009, 10:27 AM   #100
Junior Member
 
s10irocspikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucester Co. N.J.
Posts: 98
Car: 86 IROC
Engine: 350 Miniram
Transmission: T5
Axle/Gears: 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: 5.0 mustang vs 350 camaro

Sorry. I forgot to stress the fact that the car was origionally a 86 305 car. Those drab numbers with the 350 were with the stock 305 chip. I also forgot to mention that when I installed the heads, I also installed 30lb injectors. So yeah, everything was screwed up from the get go.

I am fairly confident that the combination I have now, when tuned properly and with traction, not street tires, should easily turn a 13 flat/high 12's on motor. All the above times were made on street tires AND 305 CHIP!
__________________
1986 IROC, 350, T-5, Zoom clutch, 16lb flywheel, homemade cold air, gutted MAS, BBK 52mm TB, TPIS Miniram, 30lb Motorsport injectors, AFR heads, Crane cam, Crane 1.6 rockers, SLP 1 3/4 headers, Flowmaster cat back, 3.73's, NOS/Compucar nitrous kit, LSRacing chip, 18" IROC's

Last edited by s10irocspikes; 10-03-2009 at 10:50 AM.
s10irocspikes is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2009, 10:27 AM
ThirdGen
1992 Camaro




Paid Advertisement


Reply

Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Racing Boards > Theoretical and Street Racing

Tags
305, 3rd, 50, 89, body, camaro, chevrolet, engine, fast, faster, ford, forums, gen, make, mustang, tbi
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 


1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright 1997 - 2014 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators.

Emails & Contact Details