Well I just met this kid that has a bone stock 1988 AOD Mustang GT Convertable. I have always been a 5.0 guy and I know this was the slowest 87-93 Foxbody because of the trans and weight disadvantages. He says there is nothing done to this car.

My car is a 1990 Camaro RS TBI T-5 and the only real thing that is bad with it is the trans syncros but I will be having it rebuilt here soon and then maybe wanna race after that. I have:

-K&N Open Element
-Dynomax catback
-Catco Cat
-MSD coil
-3 Degrees of timing

I have 1.6 RR sitting in my closet ready to go on

Also I am ordering headers and y-pipe as soon as I gather the rest of the money

Now keeping in mind that everything will be on my car by the time of having any chance of racing him, who do you think has this one?

Assuming you get those headers on the race will be close. Your other mods don't really add any power.

I thought exhaust was *** to these cars and the RR are supposed to do some right?

You are going to need a few more mods to take the stang. He should be in the very low 15's.

Ok well what would happen if I threw 3.73s in it with posi?

well my opinion is you'd havem..... With a tuned setup that's completely stock some have seen low 15s. The roller rockers will definetly add a couple ponies since these cams are so small. As for the exhaust it should make a substantial difference also.

I think if you had it tuned properly before the race you may see high 14s....

The 3.73s and posi should make a big difference also at least in the hooking category. If you know how to launch an auto hard than your going to be quite limited when concerned to an open rearend. + 2.73s just plain suck...

Your going to make a decent bit more torque than he is, if you have the headers and such on. You should pull on him pretty good.

OK i am by no means an expert, but from what i gather any AOD stang is much slower than their 5 speed brothers. To put on top of that the fact that the car is a vert may give you the advantage. Now all i know how its not nessacarily an even comparison, but the only times ive seen for a foxbody 5.0 AOD were 0-60 8 seconds. Dont remember the 1/4 miles.

Find it hard to believe that a car with that much power would be that slow but that is what i've seen. (the car tested was a 90 GT auto). The reason i know this information, is because the week before i bought my camaro, i put a deposit down on a 93 Triple White 5.0 Vert, with the auto trans. I wanted to see how fast it was going to be and i looked up its time and was shocked with what i saw. Like i said, magazines arnt always th emost reliable, but usually its our only source to go by when we're talking about stock vehicles.

If he really is stock, you may be able to edge him out in a shorter race.

Ive seen 88 Mustang GT's and LX 5-speed cars run 14.3's bone stock. Auto cars make 5 less hp and have higher gearing. Plus the convert slows down the car as well.

Also that is the heaviest foxbody ever made, and as for me right now, I have a T-5 not a 700R4 so I have the 3.08 gears.

What if I did this, or what if I did that....

you could just buy a camshaft and call it a day.

Alright heres the low down...

The car did NOT have 5 hp less, its the exact same motor, rear, etc... just the trannies different. What hurts them is the weak gear ratios. A 2.40 first gear in the AOD, vs the 3.35 first gear in the T5. Not to mention the T5 shifts at whichever RPM you pick, whereas the AODs, even under full throttle will usually shift extremely low! The only sure for the weak trannies are gears and converters. A shift kit helps but you can shuffle your way down the track (good old 1-D-1 shuffle)!

That car your racing is the slowest fox you can buy from 87-93 (the only saving grace is the SD) and my guess would be mid to low 15s. He has potential with it, but stock if you can run a low 15 you could probably beat him!

The autos had a more restrictive exhaust than the 5-speed models.

I hope your talking about Fbodies here because I know a little about Mustangs...

I have owned a few 5-speed ones and a few auto models... they had IDENTICLE exhaust components. Trust me on this!

Check out this article.

http://www.stangbangers.com/87_Musta...-Z_Article.htm

It states " A 4-speed auto is available if one is willing to sacrifice 5bhp consumed in the autos more restrictive exhaust."


I have read this before in other articles. This is the only one I could find though.


btw- I am not saying you are wrong. This is just what I have read.

probably ford bs to help explain why the 5-speeds were so much faster. im willing to bet that an auto GT and a 5-speed GT have the same dual exhaust.

What if I told you that you were an *******?

I bet it will be pretty close. the tbi heads really hold you back. swap the heads with some tpi 305 heads and headers. you will have him. stock vs stock as long as you get a good start you should be ok but, he will be right there.

Read what you like, I am speaking from owning a few models of each, the exhaust is exactly the same... The autos were slower because of the transmission and only the transmission. Mine was an auto, and now is a 5-speed!

I dont doubt you read it somewhere, but not everything you read is true. I guess I cant blame anyone for that misinformation but when you leave this post, remember the exhaust is no different!

JUST RACE HIM!!! If you win, you won a race. If you lose, ask for a re-match and throw more parts at the car. Sounds like a "Win, win" situation to me.

Never said I wasnt going to. But yeah when I say I am going to add parts I do, I am not a person that is like "yeah Im gonna do that" and then not. The car IS going to get headers here probably in the next week ill be ordering them.

Automatic Mustangs suffer from the trans not exhaust. They are exactly the same as mentioned.. In fact an old school trick is to run automatic ecus in 5 speed cars.

what difference would that make?

To the Mustang experts....Did the 87-89 Mustang GT 5-speeds come with 2.73's or 3.08's? Also what gearing did the autos come with.


Buddy wants to know

Some of the experts said the auto ecu gained 1 tenth in the 1/4 mile due to the timing maps being different.
87-89 Mustangs cames with 273s and 308s as options. Autos came with 327s as an option.

So they did get the 2.73 gears. Strange choice of gears

So the manuals could only get 3.27s as the highest option? That sucks

And still they ran in the mid 14's. Id like to see what a bone stock 89 5.0 can do with 3.73's.

Steepest gears were 308s on manuals.
Remember they had steep 1 st gears as well.

Wasnt it the same deal with the 2.77's used on the bw 9-bolt by GM?

how did i get a triple post lol

nm

I think the first gear ratio on t5 manual cars were 335 or something like that. If you upgraded to a motorsport T5Z/S etc... you got a 2.95 first gear ratio. Cobra Mustang Fox bodys had 335 first gears as well despite being printed other wise.

Any idea what is was on the 700RH?

700R4 had a 306 first gear and a 1.63 second gear. Thats pretty steap for an auto and optional 327 gears in OEM trim. Some people thought it was a big drop on the 1-2 shift and caused problems.. I loved it-with my 89 Formula 350 I could hit 1.9 sixty foots on radials when stock. I killed Mustang Fox bodys in 1 st gear easily. I hooked-they didn't when they were modded on the street on radials.

Mabe thats why the tires would spin so easy with the old 2.77's

Yes the auto cars could be equipped with 3.27s and were a HUGE improvement over the 2.73s that a lot of them got. The 5-speeds came with either a 2.73 or 3.08. The 3.08 cars were a little faster but most owners throw a gear in them really soon!

The ECU issue I heard (from a couple of people) was that it messed with timing and FP. I have been told once you throw a regulator and bump the timing it doesnt matter, but then again theres a lot more to it than just that! I have an auto computer in my car...

The T5s had a steep (as said 3.35) 1st gear and I thought the T5s from the Cobras had a 2.95 but it might not have. Either way a HUGE upgrade over the 2.40 the AODs got!

I was always under the impression that the Auto cars at least had a 3.08 always.

Mustangs Suck!!! I dont care what they got.

yea...they are nothing spectacular, so good luck.

lol I dont know about that. Id take an 03 SVT over any old third gen anyday.