why do the mustang 5.0 guys have more performance parts then us they even have there own drag class pro 5.0 what is the big difference between the chevy 305 and ford 302 why does every one thiink 305 cant go fast? i know the obviuos differences

 

Better look again, there are WAY more parts on the market for small-block Chevys than for 5.0 Fords. As for their own class, there were probably more 5.0 Mustangs sold than all types of Camaro and Firebird put together.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think what he is getting at is that there are more performance parts available for the 5.0 Suckstangs than for the F-body. Which is true. From what I have seen for every 1 item we can get, there are 3 to 4 types for the Suckstangs. Now if your talking about parts for the engine alone, then your wrong. The Chevy small block is the most popular and more parts available for it than just about any other engine. Just my thoughts though.

------------------
'91 Z-28 5.7, SLP 1 3/4 headers, 4 inch Mufflex/Flowmaster cat back, gutted cats, Edelbrock intake, 8.5mm Jacob wires, MSD Blaster coil, S&W subframe setup, Jacob Pro Street Ignition, complete Kenwood system.

 

LOL..because it can't..and 302's at least do have potential. 350..now thats a different story.


------------------
"American made baby. 100% American iron. The muscle among the masses. My hero. Yep, you can take your ergonomically designed, space age, computer controlled, 4 door, cup holding map lighted split double wishbone split fold down retractable cargo covered moon roof piece of transportation and keep it. For I have felt the thunder. And I know the difference!"
JSP Motorsports
ICON Motorsports

 

...

[This message has been edited by 89ProchargedROC (edited March 01, 2001).]

 

LOL wouldn't that make the 302 have more displacement than the 305 instead of the other way around? lol

The 302 has a larger bore but a shorter stroke than a 305.

I dispute this!!! The sbC head is one of the best OEM designs going, bar none! Stock 305 heads flow more than stock 302 heads.
<hr>The guys that where pointing at the numbers game where shooting in the right direcion, but not production numbers, "car at the track", and "car owners buying afterarket parts" numbers.
Acually in the third GEN production days the Mustangs & Camaros where pretty near even in sales numbers & usually the F body even out sold the Mustangs by a few numbers. The problem was guys buying F bodies weren't buying aftermarket parts for them. The Mustang guys were! The Aftermarket munufactures saw this and the market for stang parts boomed.
<hr>
As far as a 302 making more power than a 305, or being able too... well they don't!!!
The reason the stangs where quicker than the F bodies in stock form is weight. The stangs were lighter than the F body.
<hr>
Up until the early to mid 80s More parts where available for sbCs and F bodies than for sbFs and Mustangs. Now more parts are available for Mustangs than F bodies because the people bought more Mustang parts. More parts are still availible for sbCs than sbFs because they are still the most hotrodded engine ever.

<hr>The good news is that more and more aftermarket parts companies are making things for F bodies now because people are starting to mod them more than in the past.
<hr>
The bottom line is this:
If you've got a car you like & you want the Aftermarket to make parts for it you better buy what parts are availible for it. That is the only way they will make more parts availible.

------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

My IROC-Z
EFI Performance Club on Yahoo
Club IROC-Z

[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited February 28, 2001).]

 

i did make a few mistakes and you corrected them for me. you also dont have some fact straights yourself and considering your other posts i'm not going to get into a pissing party with you. so i'm not going to reply back to you in this thread.

 

I'm a 305 lover myself. I also have an 85 mustang GT and went through the same mods, porting, and tuning with that junk 302. The 302 is about the most non-torque making lump of metal that I've had the mispleasure to own. The heads were similar to the 305 as far as restriction and casting edges, but actually a little worse (especially the exhaust).
The mustang weighed 2500 lbs compared to my camaro's 3350 at the time of comparison. They were both pretty equal as far as build and tuning level, but the chevy whipped it's *** ! The 302 ran around 13.0 @ 107, and the 305 was mid 12's @105 . Considering the weight difference there was WAY more power from the chevy (especially torque).
Not sure why I gave you this comparison because it is unlikely to change anyone's opinion, but just stating where part of my own opinion came from.
it's all good though.
ODB


[This message has been edited by The ODB (edited March 05, 2001).]

 

Thanks ODB for concurring some of my opinions/facts. You are absolutely correct about the effects of simular tuning on both these engines. I have worked on many Stangs, & actually like them based on their merits, but I also know their limitations & weak points.
<hr>
<hr>
I am not interested in a **** party either but my curiosity and desire to learn makes me ask...
89ProchargedROC, what facts do I have wrong here?



------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

My IROC-Z
EFI Performance Club on Yahoo
Club IROC-Z

 

the mustangs weren't as light as you think. a fully loaded power notchback weighed in around 3280lbs according to the sticker on my buddies car w/o him
my fully loaded w/t tops iroc with power stuff from the factory weighs 3360.

-also, i wasn't disputing that the productions numbers of 5.0 stangs or third gens.....i was specifying in 99.

 

80lbs is a big difference.
By the way the stickers on the door jam are GVW not actual curb weight. The only way to know that is to use scales. You might be suprised.

The hot ticket in the 80s & early 90s for a budget racer was a light LX 5.0. Quick, light & cheap. You could buy the car tweak it a little, & even buy some performance parts like nitrous & slicks and still stay under the sticker price of a IROC. It's just the way it was.

 

if you guys are really interested in comparisons then try this--
some of the reason why the 302s were generally faster than 305s and even competed with 350s (stock mind you for all my examples) has alot to do with bore and stroke.
when you look at the 5.0 F**d it has the same 4 inch bore as the 350 chevy but with a much smaller stroke (ie crank) this means less energy from combustion has to go into spinning the rotating assembly. this directly translates to quicker acceleration of the rotating assembly and when mated to a lighter car (if previous posts are correct) this will result in more energy into accelerating the car.
now the 305 chevy on the other hand is limited to a smaller bore but has the same crank (stroke) as a 350 chevy. this makes for good mechanical advantage over the longer crank throw (more torque) but is a limitation at higher rpms where the mustang makes its power. the larger crank actually takes more energy to turn and mated with the heavyer Iroc or T/A this is a no brainer as to why the stock mustangs were fast.

I cant speak for dragstrip racing but I do know for circle track and nascar and all other road racing that you want your torque to be made at the highest RPMs as possible (practical). with the same amount of torque as you have now , if you move that curve up in the rpm scale you will make more HP and get quicker acceleration.
the large bore small stroke 302 is simply suited to high rpms better than the 305 and even the 350 BASED SOLEY upon the lower rotating energy of the motor.
there are also some valve shrouding issues that make a difference here but I dont think I know enough about them yet.


now remember all those road racers I talked about? well guess what nascar does to get 358 displacement? I cant remember exactly what the ratio is but I think they use the smallest crank available with a huge bore and they make peak torque at 7000 rpms plus.!
try doing that with a 383 stroker. youll more likely get closer to that rpm level with a straight 350 or a a 350 with a 289 crank (sounds kinda like f**ds 302 doesnt it?)

 

you're right on with what you are saying 88305tpiT/A.

Interestingly enough though, the 89 Stang 5.0 five speed and the 89 F body 5.0 5 speed had the same peak torque (300 lbs/ft) and they peaked torque at the same RPM (3200).

The Stang had 225 HP @ 4200 RPM.
The F body had 230 HP @ 4600 RPM.

The GM 5.0 actually ran a higher RPM HP peak and a slightly higher HP number.

------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

My IROC-Z
EFI Performance Club on Yahoo
Club IROC-Z

 

By the way...
How about a 350 with a 283 crank? Sound kinda like the 302 Chevy put in the 1st gen Z/28 to make the CID limit in the Trans Am series.

------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

My IROC-Z
EFI Performance Club on Yahoo
Club IROC-Z


[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited March 02, 2001).]

 

Nascar? that's apples & oranges.
Try running one of those down a dragstrip.


To confirm the weights stock without driver.

1986 Irocz auto w/T-tops = 3450 lbs
1988 Mustang GT 5-speed = 3250 lbs
1985 Mustang GT 5-speed = 3050 lbs

A friend of mine named Jim sold the 302+5speed out of his 88 Mustang GT. We picked up a stock 350 TPI engine from a wrecked 88-Irocz, sold the TPI, and put on an Edlebrock intake & Carb. He put the chevy 350 into his 88 mustang. Jim put on the stock log-style exhaust manifolds, and ran a turbo350 tranny with the stock 3.08 rear gears. With no tuning at all it ran 13 flat right at 110 MPH. That was on fully treaded radials & a 2.2 60-ft time.

There is no comparison between the stock 350 (or 305) and the ford 302.
Put log manifolds on the 302 with the turbo350 tranny & 3.08 gears and the same car would be lucky to break into the 16's.

[This message has been edited by The ODB (edited March 05, 2001).]

 

Im moving this to general engine.
Keep it clean guys!

------------------
-86 IROC
Vortech Supercharged 406
-=ICON Motorsports=-
"Well, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?"

 

i unlocked this, i'm thinking it got locked by mistake. can't say i really read every word, but i didn't see anything to lock it so i'm guessing something happened when guido moved it here. have fun and play nice guys.

------------------
ICON Motorsports

1st & 3rd

 

i guess my main question is why cant i make my 305 go fast i was thinking about some 305 torqer heads how mutch horsepower do these add maybe later a small roots style blower

 

FYI the NASCAR 358 combo is 4.155" bore with a 3.31" stroke. To put that into perspective, a SBC 400 has 4.125" bore. A SBC 327 has a 3.25" stroke to go with its 4" bore. But that is only a tiny piece of what make those motors able to run at 8000 RPM all afternoon long with no more than 1 or 2 out of 43 failing at most races.

The 302 F*rd has a couple of advantages over the SBC. The first and biggest is that the SBC has a pattern of 5 head bolts around each cylinder (thought important by the original designers back in the early 50s) while the F*rd motor only has 4 (it's nearly 10 years newer design). After you cast in a place in the heads for all those bolts, plus places for the push rods, you don't have alot of room left over for ports; and the ports are forced to be sort of contorted besides. Second, the induction system that F*rd put on the 5.0 is altogether superior in its ability to support high-RPM flow, compared to the GM TPI. The TPI is designed to produce high torque at relatively low RPMs, at the expense of high RPM horsepower, in keeping with the overall design of the 305. The F*rds have alot less low RPM torque, so the gearing has to be different; that's why the T-5 F*rds are so much faster than the autos.

Still, the F car is so much better of a car that it's worthwhile as far as I'm concerned to deal with the motor deficiencies. Our cars look better, handle better, brake better, are more comfortable, last longer without faling to pieces, and are just plain a better car than the competition. The only thing the Brand F's do better than ours is straight-line acceleration, and that's only if both are still in stock form. Mod for mod, you'll get more out of the SBC in the long run.

------------------
"So many Mustangs, so little time..."
ICON Motorsports

 

If that is true, can you explain why the Chevy engine makes slightly more HP and it peaks at a higher RPM than the drof 5.0, while making the same peak torque numbers at the same peak torque RPM? It seems the Chevy has a wider power curve with at least as much low end and more top end?


[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited March 04, 2001).]

 

I thought the Chevy 302 was a 327 with a 283 crank????


------------------
1993 C1500 Indy 500 Edition
1992 TA TPI setup
Stock motor, new one being built now.
www.geocities.com/wsleigh



[This message has been edited by 93ND500 (edited March 04, 2001).]

 

95nd500, the 302 chevy was basically a 327 with a 283 crank. the 302 was what the 4 bolt main block was made for, and carried over to the 350. i believe except for the 67 302s all the others were large journal cranks and 4 bolt blocks with 4" bore. that was a long time ago and not very many were made and if you have one it's worth more for it's collector/restoration value than it's preformance value.

------------------
ICON Motorsports

1st & 3rd

 

91+92 only...
Try looking at another year, where the GM output is lower. And I dont know where you got your info from, but the GM engine peaked at 4400, not 4600.

Have you ever owned a Mustang? Ever seen the power curve of both engines? RB is on target about the induction of brand F being better. Ive seen both, worked with both, and the GM setup really looks like they ran out of money to design it as it should have been designed, or the engineer knew little about design.

BTW its not an apples to apples comparison anyway, the cams are different, and so is the compression ratio. And to call what they put on the exhaust side of the mustangs headers... I guess they look like headers, but with the number of bends and crimps in the pipes I would use that term rather loosely.

And to answer the original question... why does everyone think the 305 cant go fast? Well.. two 302s were offered, Carbed then FI. There is the 305 Carbed, 305 HO, 305 CFI, 305 TBI, 305 TPI, 350 TPI... The LG4 is a dog. The HO was better but there werent all that many of those. The CFI... LOL! The TBI is a dog. The 305 at first was too, and very slowly improved, but it took 6 years to do it. That last one, the 350, is another reason. Why build a 305 when you can do a 350 that is faster? And at the time these cars were sold, contrary to popular opinion on this board, the stangs were faster. People (read:youngins) who wanted a car that was fast and easy to modify went to ford rather than GM. Now with the LS1 cars (even the LT1 since Ford went to the silly 4.6) people have been buying GM's instead of Fords. Theres also too many so-called 'hot-rodders' swapping in TPI's into their 32 Fords and Chevys and stuff like that, and they are willing to pay rediculous prices for performance parts, whereas the 302 isnt used and the people that have been buying stuff for the 302s arent willing to pay a premium. Theres a million reasons it went the way it did, and you combine all those and you end up with the answer to your question of why in general the 305 is viewed as slow and why the performance parts area sucks and is expensive.

 

BTW, why DOES the mustang weigh so much less than the Camaro?

 

Its not all that much. You are talking about ~200lbs maybe. 40 of that is in the engine block itself, the K-member is lighter, theres a bunch of useless holes in the front fenderwells, etc etc.

 

I have to agree with whoever it was that talked about the quality of the cars for more than heading down the strip. Just look at the firewall! The Ford looks cheaply put together to me.

Now the 302 has a bore advantage over the 305. 305's are known for shrouding the valves, and the Ford motorsport heads that are available do perform nicely compared to anything you can do to a 305. Just a restriction of the small bore. And no, I'm not a Ford fan, I really don't even like them!

I also thin khte TPI setup is better at lower RPM's than at higher, compared to FOrd's, or the LT1's. Just listen to a few of them rev up! The Ford's and the LT1's rev much quicker.

I will give Ford credit in one other thing, and that is the sound of their exhaust from the factory. And the fact that it is true dual exhaust.

Now I feel like I need to go sleep in my Camaro tonight to make it feel better for how nice I've been to the Rustang's!

------------------
Working on:
'84 Z28 LG4 305 with 200,000 original miles!
Added dual elec fans.
145 MPH IROC Speedo
Building 430 HP 350 (ZZ430)
using primarily GMPP parts.
Short block sitting on a stand.

Starting to look like the Kicker poster child!

ASE Certified Master Tech

 

I quoted 89 numbers because I knew them to be correct on both cars. The GM numbers improved through out the years mostly do to cam imrovements. The intake & heads remained unchanged. These are widely known numbers. You can get them anywhere, including here at thirdgen.org, in the TECH section, https://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/tech/techdb.shtml . The automatice 5.0 F bodies had a cam with less duration hence the 4400 RPM HP peak for those. The 5 speed 5.0 F bodies had a cam with more duration, & different LSA, and therefore a higher RPM horsepower peak than the automatics.

I just compared cars most simular in build, (both 89s & both 5 speeds) that I knew the numbers to off the top of my head.
Yes, and I have extensive experience with the following.

• 85 GT› stock chassis Cobra 5.0 crate shortblock + trickflow heads- street/strip
• 86 GT carbed› all stock parts just tweeked- street only
• 86 SVO› road raced/autocrossed only- fully modified chassis, engine/turbo, & body, full effort racecar.
• 87 GT› street/strip mildly modded 89 engine
• 88 GT› street/strip- heavily modded engine & chassis
• 89 LX street/strip/autocross- mild mods.

Not to mention all the ones of friends & racing buddies I have worked on.

In a single sentance: YES, been there done that!

That's a huge amount when racing!!!
That is enough to lose 4-6 MPH in the ¼mile with a13½-14½ second car. That is what power to weight ratio is all about.

Yep, also less insulation, lighter brakes, lighter seats, and a bunch of other things.
As racers say, "It is easier to drop 1 ounce in 16 different places than 1 pound in one place".


I still contend that off the show room floor the power output of the two 5.0s where simular, with GM being slightly better towards the end of the thirdgen years. The big difference in straight line acceleration was due to weight.


[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited March 04, 2001).]

 

Oh yeah...
You can use Trickflow twisted wedge heads on a 305 if you watch exhaust lift, and you can use Airflow Research 180, 190 or 195 heads with 1.94 and 1.55 valves on the 305. That is exceptional airflow capability for a street 5.0. The trickflows even reduce shrouding, & even with the AFRs flow well.

rdayz28, I would recommend one of these head choices.
You can build a 305 to go plenty fast, there are some running full weight 305 F bodies in the 9s in the ¼. Someone mentioned Preston smith in a reply above, 305, Stock intake parts(plenum runners & base) that have been ported, Trickflow heads, Vortech supercharger. I heard here that he dropped the Vortech in favor of a turbo setup. He's going to be even quicker!

You can get lots of other parts for your 305 too. You can stroke to 335 CID using a modded 400 crank. you can cam it up a little more. You can get aftermarket intakes & exhausts galore. Plus once you get the engine performing well with basic building, you can add a power adder like nitrous or forced induction. There is a lot you can do to a small block chevy and it will respond very well.


[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited March 04, 2001).]

 

Your'r right ede. 95nd500, the 302, 327 and 350 all share the same 4.00 inch bore. The 327 had a shorter stroke than the 350 and the 302 had an even shorter stroke than the 327.

You're right there too ede.
A buddy of mine lost one when a machine shop butchered his '67 4.00" bore, small journal engine The shop promised to replace it but they haven't & probably never will. That was years ago and they are hard to find. Only produced one year.

 

Actually I source my information from the manufacturer, not websites due to the fact they are usually incorrect, as is the case here. Thats why I say 4400, because thats whats printed in the brochures from GM.

 

Max,

...Like GM never "skimped" on the HP numbers they advertised? O.K.

Hey, let's save some of this for the Dorf dudes. They need more crap from us anyway. The best time to kick a guy is when he's already limping. Besides, I've already done my good deed for the summer. I helped a guy get his 5.0 Mousetank out of storage on Saturday. I charged his battery while I listened to him talk about some of his better times and performance. After I dug a timeslip out of the console on my wife's "beater" Impala and told him it still weighs 4,400 pounds, he said thanks and left. Wearing a bow tie can be fun at times.

------------------
Later,
Vader
------------------
"I'm'a do Things My Way - It's My way or the Highway."
Adobe Acrobat Reader

 

Sales brochures! LOL!!!
Did it mention the difference in cam profiles? LOL? How much duration did it say the two different cams cams had?


I give up!!!

All I can say now is that I wish the 82-92 GM cars had been a couple hundred pounds lighter than a Stang instead of a couple hundred pounds heavier. That 400 pound difference would have put the thirdgen F body where the Stangs are now in performance parts availability and sales. We wouldn't be saying bu-bye to F body production just yet.


------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

My IROC-Z
EFI Performance Club on Yahoo
Club IROC-Z

 

[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited March 05, 2001).]

 

Internet resources? LMFAO!!!

At least I took information from the manufacturer. And no, the cams arent listed in the brochure, but 2 different HP ratings are... what a novel concept!

 

Showroom sales propaganda is not meant to be an all inclusive technical data guide. They are written by advertising firms not profesional engine builders. I'm sure that if you look closely at it that it will have a disclaimer stating something like this:
"We have tried to make this sales brochure as comprehensive and factual as possible. However, we reserve the right to make changes at any time without notice in prices, colors, materials, equipment, specifications, models & availability. Since some information may have changed since the time of printing, please check with your GM dealer for complete details." That's their way of saying it might be wrong.

My dial indicators & degree wheels tell no false tales!

I know for a fact from first hand experience that there where indeed different cams used.
Two different cams with different LSAs and valve event durations will have power peaks at different RPMs, all else being the same.

Besides that we are quibbling over nothing!!!
Even the power curve for the 5.0 TPI automatics where at 4400 RPM. that's still 200 RPM higher than the 5.0 f*rds peak.

<table border="1" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="2"><tr><td>ENGINE</TD><TD>TORQUE</TD><TD>HORSEPOWER</TD></TR><TR><TD>F*RD 5.0 HO</TD><TD>300 lbs/ft @ 3200 RPM</td><td>225 @ 4200 RPM</td></tr><TR><TD>GM
5.0 TPI
AUTOMATIC</TD><TD>300 lbs/ft @ 3200 RPM</td><td>225 @ 4400 RPM</td></tr><TR><TD>GM
5.0 TPI
STICK</TD><TD>300 lbs/ft @ 3200 RPM</td><td>230 @ 4600 RPM</td></tr></table>
My point about the power curve for all three is still the same.
The peak for the automatic trannie GM was 200 RPM higher than the power peak for the F*rd. The peak for the GM stick car was 400 RPM higher than the F*rds.
Either way it's higher. That was my point in the first place and we are quibbling over how much higher.?!
From the factory, using either manufactures best numbers the GM had a wider power band and peaked at higher RPM.
That was my point in the first place.
That means the GM engine design was not as bad (compared to F*rds) as some might think.

Still the best power outputs of the 5.0 port injected engines from both manufacturers where simular!!!

If the F body had been 400 lbs lighter (or the Stang 400 lbs heavier) so the 200 or so lbs advantage had been GMs then the F body would have whupped pony butt from the factory.


[This message has been edited by IROCKZ4me (edited March 05, 2001).]

 

rdayz28,
if you are having trouble finding certain parts for your car feel free to send me an email. I can likely show you where to find what you are looking for.

------------------

Tracy /AKA IROCKZ4me
'86 IROC-Z Camaro
"Cogito ergo zoom"

• 355 cid
• AFR heads
• Arizona Speed & Marine hydraulic roller cam w/ AFR hydra-rev kit
• modified SLP runners
• TRW forged pistons/ceramic coated
• fully balanced
• Edelbrock headers/ceramic coated
• SLP cat-back
• Paxton supercharger
• Nitrous Express nitrous oxide

My IROC-Z
EFI Performance Club on Yahoo
Club IROC-Z

 

Hi guys,

All of this 305 and 302 talk is quite interesting. You guys (all of you) made some damn good points! LOL!! Peak horsepower & torque, coupled with a good power to weight ratio ALWAYS proved to make a good STRIGHT LINE PERFORMER (i.e. 5.0 Stangs - mod or not), but obviously GM wanted to maintain it's stature as having great HANDLING, great STRAIGHT LINE performing cars as an overall package!

Let's face it... late model 3rd Gen 305 TPI 5 speed cars, namely IROCs and FORMS (due to their lower weight than T/As and GTA with the same setup) OUT THE BOX ran neck and neck in the 1/4 and often whooped the lighter 5speed Stangs of the same years!! I've seen it too many times at the strip. But we F-Body owners have sleeker, better handling, WAY MORE comfortable cars! Hey, if JUST going fast in a straight line gives you a woody, any Hi-Perf light "BOX" on 4 wheels can do that!!

Thanx, but no thanx I'm stickin' with GM's plan - They had a better idea from the start (A TOTAL PERFORMANCE PACKAGE!!) And let's not forget what wrath would've been brought upon the industry IF GM had ALLOWED the 5.7 TPI to be coupled with the 'Vette's ZF 6speed IN 3rd Gen F-BODIES!!

WANNA DEBATE?? Try a SUPER RARE '92 Firehawk VS '92 Cobra Stang discussion... THERE IS NO DISCUSSION!!! Something that just crossed my mind... LOL... I know... that's comparing apples with BRICKS!

nFORM91

------------------
Proud newly acquired '91 Formula 305 TPI 700R4, 34K miles, Factory Black on Black all stock - no current HP mods (might keep that way!). Rims are '91 T/A black Diamond Spoke 16x8s. 20% tint & Black Widow Alarm system. Very near future plans: K&N filter, catback Flows, fresh paint job, new 255ZRs all around.