Well, went out and test drove a Mustang yesterday...and fell in love with it. Having owned 3 F-bodys so far, I can now understand why so many of them have trouble keeping up with 5.0s...well, guess it's time to start using my employee discount here at the dealership...

 

thats great now go test drive an ls1 ....

 

LMAO he definately needs to drive an LS1
5.7 LS1 or 4.6?
You do the math.


------------------
1998 Ford Ranger 3.0 Cold air intake and flowmaster exhaust.
FOR SALE: 1995 Red T-Top Camaro...Got a ticket, now my insurance is too high...
1989 5.0 RS

 

$5000 5.0 vs. $25000 LS1...hmm...?

I'm just going to make an assumption here, but most people in the market for a 13 year old 5.0 can't afford a brand new car. If I could, I'd either be driving an LS1 Firebird or an '01 Cobra. I know you guys are more sensible than this, so let's compare apples to apples here fellas.

 

umm i got the impression it's a new GT. Because of the discount at the dealership. Most dealerships around here only offer discounts for their employees on new vehicles. Maybe I got it wrong. Who knows, my point is i prefer a 5.7 to a 4.6 unless the 4.6 is the DOHC cobra motor then it'd be close. neither one are slow, by any means.
Now that i read it again, i guess he is talkin about a fox-body 5.0.

------------------
1998 Ford Ranger 3.0 Cold air intake and flowmaster exhaust.
FOR SALE: 1995 Red T-Top Camaro...Got a ticket, now my insurance is too high...
1989 5.0 RS

[This message has been edited by uno (edited October 26, 2001).]

 

I've been following his posts on here and on the Corral. He bought a 5-speed 88 GT. I assumed you guys knew from his previous post on here regarding the 88 GT that got closed, sorry.

------------------
1989 Mustang LX 5.0 Coupe
13.34@106.7 - needs more gear and converter

1992 Mustang LX 5.0 Convertible
14.23 @ 95.something - 100% bone stock motor - it's been a while since I've ran this one

1993 LX 2.3L Hatchback - "The Ride to VCU"

Moderator Stangtec.com, SN95.com
Amelia and Nic's Twin Terrors

 

yeah, it's a 88 GT. Discount was referring to the parts I can buy from FRPP at my dealership. I've had the change to drive a LS1 F-body before, and my lil ole stang won't hold a candle to them...well, at least right now...Major modifications in the works, be a while, but it'll be a decent car eventually. Personally, I like F-bodys, and I like stangs, but as far as 1988 is concerned, there really is no comparison, at least stock for stock. Besides, I've been doing chevy's for too long now, need to start crackin open new motors(new to me that is)and learning some more.

 

Actually, we've had a few '01 Cobras here at Lou Grubb, and none of them felt incredibly fast in my opinion..maybe it's just the lack of power below 4 grand or so...dunno, maybe I need to get my pants re-calibrated...

 

Welcome to the dark side! I love my Mustang. Have fun!
-Todd-

------------------
1989 Formula WS6
Recently re-converted back to bone-stock for economy.
-L03, Auto, 2.73, etc.
Best Run(formerly modified): 14.1 @ 97 mph.
Recent Run(Stock): 16.1 @ 83 mph.
=========================
1988 Mustang GT
-T-tops, E-303 Cam/1.6 rollers, 3.73 gears, Auto, 4" cowl,
fiberglass hatch, Hooker headers into Flowmaster 40s, and much more.
Best run: 13.87 @ 98 mph.
=========================
1991 Mercury Topaz
-2.3 HSC I4, Auto, winter beater.
=========================
1986 Buick Regal
-Drag car project for my built Olds 403 V8.

 

Yep, a 88 GT is faster than its F-body counterpart...stock. I can understand why you would buy one because from what I understand the parts are also much cheaper. But then again everyone and their secretary drive one. I'll keep my T/A but to each his own
peace

 

Good luck with the new Wheels!

------------------
1988 Jet Black IROC
5.7L W/ 64000 miles
Flowmaster Exhaust
Fully Loaded
------------------

My IROC In Readers Rides
My IROC

 

in all honesty wether you like it or not the mustang fox body was a much better design then the 3rd gen f-body, really the 3rd gen f-body is one of th poorest flatforms to make alot of power off of and GM tooling in the 80's was pretty bad, but at least they got the G-bodys right!

 

Please list factual statistics to back up your claim instead of personal preference. Anybody can come on here and say "Ford Tempo's were a much better design than the f-body". What exactly do you mean by 'better design'?

 

Reason i would take the new cobra is it makes 320 hp 317 lb-ft Torque and runs the quarter in 13.8
not too shabby stock.... i just watched it on speed vision while i was posting that
Ford is gettin better


------------------
1998 Ford Ranger 3.0 Cold air intake and flowmaster exhaust.
FOR SALE: 1995 Red T-Top Camaro...Got a ticket, now my insurance is too high...
1989 5.0 RS

 

my bad , i thought he was talking about a new gt also , im not a very complete reader

 

My friend had a 88 gt, man that little sucker moved...flowmaster 40s on it 5 speed.. but he really beat the sh*t out of that car. LoL thats why I loved riding in it every stop turned into a brake-stand or and a burnout . He use to do alot of street racing until he got his *** handed to him by an 68 vett . He ended up selling it for a rice rocket ... Good luck on the new toy

------------------
1988 Sport Coupe 305 TBI
K&N
Flowmaster 80


Daily driver:
1988 K1500 5.7 4x4 shortbed flowmaster cat-back gutted cat.
AIM: RyanNH84

 

Don't feel bad, you're not going to the darkside, unless you get a *****.

------------------
"Rice burners are like tampons...Every pu$$y has to have one"
'86 IROC
T-TOPS, TINTED WINDOWS, BRAKE LIGHT BLACKOUTS
GM GOODWRENCH 350
EDELBROCK TES HEADERS
3" Hooker CatBack w/Aero Chamber muffler
EDELBROCK 600CFM CARB.
KN AIRFILTER
ACCEL HEI DISTRIBUTOR
160* Stat, just switched to 180* b/c of winter coming and going to college in the mts.
3:73 Posi
Rebuilt 700R4
B&M Megashifter, 5" Autometer Tach w/shift lite

 

Well, I'm amazed at the lack of flame! A few years ago, I would have had to been taken to the burn ward....then again, not much of a surprise since just about EVERYONE has joined to repel the ***** army marching to our doors...heheheh...As for the T.V. show running a 13.8 stock in the quarter...they need a better driver! Ford literature has it running 13.8, and I've personally seen a few of them (supposedly stock, might not have been "truly" stock) run around 13.5 on stock tires...BFG Comp T/A's I think...

 

Amen! Don't care if it's a Mustang or an F-body so long as it's fast and the owners not a bitch.

Sad thing about a lot of these cars is that a lot of young guys get ahold of them and rag them out (as I did to my 'vert and am now really regretting it). Just set a plan for yourself and stick to it and try not to go overboard with the race only stuff or you'll regret it in the long run.

------------------
1989 Mustang LX 5.0 Coupe
13.34@106.7 - needs more gear and converter

1992 Mustang LX 5.0 Convertible
14.23 @ 95.something - 100% bone stock motor - it's been a while since I've ran this one

1993 LX 2.3L Hatchback - "The Ride to VCU"

Moderator Stangtec.com, SN95.com
Amelia and Nic's Twin Terrors

 

Can some1 tell me the HP and TQ figures of the 88 M*****g and what it ran stock??

------------------
89 RS
STILL Looking For:
An 87 IROC-Z28 350 TPI

Yeah I have an RS, but I want an IROC-Z!!

 

i'm drivin my uncles 93? gt tommorow...
it has a supercharger on it...
i bet its a bit faster than my 'roc,
too bad i couldn't check it out stock...
oh well, my car STILL looks better and it doesnt have 18 inch cobra wheels, or all this other ****...
lol, i'm bored and tired

------------------
1989 Iroc 305 5spd
mods: airfoil, MAF screens, flowmaster 80's, 3.45 posi, K&N's, few other things
This weekend: 2 new hi-flow cats & hooker cat-back

Other:
Tints, Eclipse CD8051 HU, Nakamichi pa504 (50x4 watts), Polk 4x6's, Polk 6x9's, Xtant 1001x amp (1000 watts), 2 xtant X-series 12 inch subs= people know i'm comin' a block away

 

225HP and 300 ft/lbs TQ

The magazine figures are all over the place so i'll ignore quoting those. Stock times are in the mid to high 14's range based on what the guys at the corral.net have reported. Lightly modded 5.0's can hit low 14's very easily. LX's are a tad bit lighter than GT's so they are a bit quicker

I ran my '88 5.0 with an automatic and got a Bone stock time of 14.8 @ 93MPH. It would have been quicker with a 5-spd. Check the sig for current mods and times

------------------
Mike
--Black '88 Mustang LX 5.0L AOD--
BBK Headers, Off-Road H-pipe, MAC 2.5" Cat-back exhaust, UD Pulleys
3.73's, FMS "C" Springs, Tokico Shocks,
'93 Pony rims, Saleen Spoiler
5-spd swap VERY soon

-14.42 @ 98MPH (w/ 2.4 60-footer)-

[This message has been edited by Mustang5L5 (edited October 26, 2001).]

 

One of my best friend's has a 92 Mustang GT, 5.0 5-speed and he lets me drive it now and then. Not very impressed w/ it, stock vs. stock about the same as my L98 IROC, maybe a little quicker b/c of the 5-speed. It doesn't handle nearly as well as the IROC and IMHO looks like an Escort on steroids. But the 5.0L engine is a proven performer with some well chosen mods (a SBC 350 is too though). Wouldn't be my first choice, but it's not a bad choice.

------------------
89 IROC-SuperRammed 355 w/ AFR 190's and LPE 219/219 cam-http://www.geocities.com/buckeyeroc

 

Thanks. I don't see why u didn't go with an L98 IROC or Z28, even of the same year. As u probably know a 5.7 has more potential and not to mention the way they handle.

88 IROC-Z 350 TPI: 230HP and 330TQ

1/4 Mile: low 14's stock

Also, the statement about how the M*****g's are built compared to Third Gens qualitywise, is BS. I've seen it and heard it for myself. Thanks.

[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited October 26, 2001).]

 

Or a 305 TPI G92 5 Speed.

 

ok well lets compair. the fox body stags can easily have full length headers and duel exhaust (stock from the factory with hi flow manifolds, and duel's with h-pipe) most f-body's can only dream of a duel exhause unless it is bent and snaked around like crazy, and full leanth headers are basically impossible unless its a drag car and the headers hang about an inch off the ground and theres no way you can drive on the street like that (advantage mustang) the mustang used a bit stronger fox body vs. the f-bodys unit body, both need frame ties but the mustangs are ALOT cheaper and streanthen the frame much better then the f-bodys (advantage mustang) also for rear axles f-bodys started with the 9 bolt which is pretty junky and then stepped up to the 7.5 10 bolt which also was just mediocre, the stang's got the 7.5 early which was a total POS then stepped up to the 8.8 which is a hell of an axle (advantage mustang) the mustangs 302 is a much better engine then the 305 5.0 litre, they respond to anything and are a breeze to work on, the 305 carbs are a joke along with the throttle body's the TPI's are a step in the right direction, but a bitch to work on, you have to plan out an afternoon just to change the plugs! the 350 tpi is a good setup, but the lack of a 5-speed really lacked the 350 cars down compared to the 5.0's with the cobras and others that there 5-speeds will handle the power no problem. also the TPI is really limited compaird to the mustangs EFI setup, these can be eaisly swapped out for aftermarket units that cost only from 400$ for a trick flow unit up to the paxton supercharger. TPI's cant really do anything except mabey some runners, that 300$, injectors, that another $400+ or a superram for about 3,500$ (advantage mustang) basically from a powerhouse standpoint the mustang has the f-body beat big time, the 3rd gen f-body really wasnt the best of the previous or the 4th gen as the 80's tooling was really bad at GM (just look at all the crappy econo boxes littering junkyards) the thing that the f-bodys have the stang beat are on more day to day use things such as handleing, the WS-6 t/a's tight ratio stearing, 16x8 rims, big as front and rear bars and decent rear gear ratio and low stance really give make them outstanding handling cars compared to the 5.0's sloppy steering and 15" wheels and higher flatform make them a little more sluggish compared to the f-body (advantage f-body) also braking, the 4WD setups on the fbodys were a great setup, that i know of i dont belive the 5.0's got a 4WD setup factory, i know alot of people do the conversions. the 4wd on the f-bodys will stop on a dime and with the stiff suspention and bairly any nose diving you can stop easly and handle it, the 5.0 had just disc in the front and have a dentency to nosedive and not stop quite as good (advantage f-bodys),.........but all in all you really need to see what the 3rd gen was build to do, it was designed in 82' when power was at its worst, and GM didnt see it stopping anytime soon, from its past with the 455 SD's and 396 SS"s back then it was all to make a car haul in a staight line, in 82' they said (well, were not going to get any power out of them anytime soon so lets make them handle and brake like nothing els" and that they did, power wasnt the main thing on there minds, and the 305 carb was "thee" powerhouse engine back in 82' with a whopping what, 100 hp? :-D thats why the 4th gen went back to a much stronger chassis as power was back and with avengence.

 

I agree on some things (which I will note) but I disagree with much. U don't seem to know much about F-Bodies, (although maybe more than the average M*****g dude) especially the Third Gens.:

*the fox body stags can easily have full length headers and duel exhaust (stock from the factory with hi flow manifolds, and duel's with h-pipe) most f-body's can only dream of a duel exhause unless it is bent and snaked around like crazy, and full leanth headers are basically impossible unless its a drag car and the headers hang about an inch off the ground and theres no way you can drive on the street like that (advantage mustang)*

I kinda agree with that, but its all been done before in some way on these cars. So..
U also have to consider that we have to be detuned sometimes because of a "higher" car from Chevy, we are allowed to be faster than u guys stock but not much more than that.

*the mustang used a bit stronger fox body vs. the f-bodys unit body, both need frame ties but the mustangs are ALOT cheaper and streanthen the frame much better then the f-bodys (advantage mustang)*

Yeah, we all know the gr8 quality F**ds are known for, LOL!! Of course their stuff costs less because they are a cheaper company that makes cheaper cars, and I know this 1st hand. When M*****g guys aren't bringing their cars in for a recall, they're always fixing something else. How do I know?? I know dudes with them and other F**ds that are fixing something every other day. They always want to know how an 89 Camaro that was always driven "funly" holds up like it does with all the miles that are on it with no interior sounds, and why every time they do something theirs is broken.

*also for rear axles f-bodys started with the 9 bolt which is pretty junky and then stepped up to the 7.5 10 bolt which also was just mediocre, the stang's got the 7.5 early which was a total POS then stepped up to the 8.8 which is a hell of an axle (advantage mustang)*

They started with the 10 bolt and went to the 9, other way. The Borg Warner 9 bolt is a good rear end, BETTER than the 7.5 10 bolt, and there is a few guys here with 305's running around mid 12's on THE 10 bolt with the 5 Speed T-5 and they are doing fine. U figure. They do not get the credit they deserve at times, especially the BW 9bolt which is the better rear and can handle more. Are they the best though, no. That would be the Chevy 12 bolt, expensive though.

*the mustangs 302 is a much better engine then the 305 5.0 litre, they respond to anything and are a breeze to work on, the 305 carbs are a joke along with the throttle body's the TPI's are a step in the right direction, but a bitch to work on, you have to plan out an afternoon just to change the plugs! the 350 tpi is a good setup, but the lack of a 5-speed really lacked the 350 cars down compared to the 5.0's with the cobras and others that there 5-speeds will handle the power no problem. also the TPI is really limited compaird to the mustangs EFI setup, these can be eaisly swapped out for aftermarket units that cost only from 400$ for a trick flow unit up to the paxton supercharger. TPI's cant really do anything except mabey some runners, that 300$, injectors, that another $400+ or a superram for about 3,500$ (advantage mustang)*

The 305 isn't the F-Bodies best engine, it never was and still isn't. It was used as the top engine in the earlier 80's because of economy, but when that got better the 350 returned again and is still used now. U can't really compare them because GM likes to make its power with bigger engines like a Muscle Car should, not like "Sporty Coupes" with smaller engines and less overall potential. Yeah, TPI can be a b***h to work on and stuff is expensive for it, but I wouldn't really call that a disadvantage. If u know what u are doing u will get used to it, there is stuff u can do to it for free, it looks really good, and sometimes u get what u pay for. I say the TPI's Torque and MuscleCar feel would also be the advantage here. U also don't have to say again that parts for your cars are cheap. They have to be, who would pay alot to mod or mess with a F**d?? That would be crazy.

*basically from a powerhouse standpoint the mustang has the f-body beat big time, the 3rd gen f-body really wasnt the best of the previous or the 4th gen as the 80's tooling was really bad at GM (just look at all the crappy econo boxes littering junkyards)*

Thats a complete bunch of BS. Why don't u go there and look at all THE 80's AND 90's F**d econo boxes littering the junkyards?? I don't know how a F**d guy could even say that about GM during any years LOL!! Obviously the 80's quality was good at GM, these cars prove that so many years later, so do others too. Better than M*****gs and F**ds then, as always. Every 80's M*****g I see looks and like it needs to be rebuilt, alot of the 90's too.

*the thing that the f-bodys have the stang beat are on more day to day use things such as handleing, the WS-6 t/a's tight ratio stearing, 16x8 rims, big as front and rear bars and decent rear gear ratio and low stance really give make them outstanding handling cars compared to the 5.0's sloppy steering and 15" wheels and higher flatform make them a little more sluggish compared to the f-body (advantage f-body)*

Agreed, but the IROC-Z's are actually the best handlers. Although a V6 RS's suspension could out handle a M*****g.

*also braking, the 4WD setups on the fbodys were a great setup, that i know of i dont belive the 5.0's got a 4WD setup factory, i know alot of people do the conversions. the 4wd on the f-bodys will stop on a dime and with the stiff suspention and bairly any nose diving you can stop easly and handle it, the 5.0 had just disc in the front and have a dentency to nosedive and not stop quite as good (advantage f-bodys)*

Agreed, Very Correct.

*but all in all you really need to see what the 3rd gen was build to do, it was designed in 82' when power was at its worst, and GM didnt see it stopping anytime soon, from its past with the 455 SD's and 396 SS"s back then it was all to make a car haul in a staight line, in 82' they said (well, were not going to get any power out of them anytime soon so lets make them handle and brake like nothing els" and that they did, power wasnt the main thing on there minds, and the 305 carb was "thee" powerhouse engine back in 82' with a whopping what, 100 hp? :-D thats why the 4th gen went back to a much stronger chassis as power was back and with avengence.*

Not really. What u just decribed was the early Third Gens. It was like that alot until 87, being the year power started making its come back (which kept improving from 87 to 92)with the 350 TPI when they felt the economy was good enough. So now they could do all those things better than the competition and be faster. Where's a site where we can see your HP and TQ ratings and stuff from 82 to 92?? If u want to look at ours just go to the main page and into Tech Data and get some of your stuff right. When u buy a Third Gen, u buy a versatile car that can do many things instead of buying a car that can only do maybe 1. Lets keep this a nice conversation though. Thanks.




[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited October 27, 2001).]

 

When I was in the market for buying another car( this was when the first Iroc was stolen) I test drove an 88 Gt and a fox body. I do have to admit the power difference from the chev 5.0 was huge, but why do all 5.0 stangs handle like a Tempo?

 

actually, the 84-86 SVO turbo 4 cylinder mustangs for 4WDB from the factory...I've been doing my homework!

 

i am by no means a ford guy, i've never owned one but i wouldnt mind haveing one, but respect is givin where its deserved, regardless of manufacture. just saying "mustangs suck and thats it" is a very stupid attitute, tho somtimes its hard to admit something is better, really no matter how you look at it the fox body really had a better setup over the 3rd gen fbody for all out power. and iroc your really just giving me opinion not fact. dont forget that same 302 has been being used sence the 60's on the old boss and mach-1 stangs and has been making LOTS of power for over 30 years, the 305 came out in i belive 77' as an economy smog engine and was used from then on untill they finally got the 350 to pass emissions, but agian no 5-speed limited it. plus your saying the 9 bolt is better and was used first? what are you smoking? if it was a better rear why do the 4th gens use the 7.5 ten bolt and not the 9 bolt?

 

Everything I said was fact. Maybe u should read my post again. They started with the 10bolt and kept getting upgraded through the years, but when they realized that some of them weren't doing too good with any kind of power, the BW was put in cars with higher performance because it can handle more. I think BW stopped making those rears and GM went with strengthening up the 10bolt some and used them on 4th Gens. The BW is better than the 10bolt though, thats why they were used in cars with more power.



[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited October 27, 2001).]

 

Holy Crap!
TempesT68 - Put out the joint. Pot makes you stupid.

Now, I don't want to get off on a rant here but...
IROCZTWENTYGR8 is right about the rear-ends.
The 4th gens use the 10-bolt 7.625" NOT 7.5" - the 10 bolt was upgraded in 87-88. They use this rear end because it is cheaper. The Borg-Warner rear end was used from 87-90 as a performance alternative to the less-durable 7.5" 10-bolt. But it cost more. G.M. went back to the 10-bolt in 1990.

As far as the pi$$ing contest about what is a better car - come on! we could argue this till we are all blue in the face! Who cares! A solid case can be made for either car.

As for the engines - do you know what the difference is between the Small Block Chevrolet 305 and the 350 is??? - The bore size. Thats it! The crankshafts even interchange. They are basically the same engine. One has bigger pistons - thus larger displacement.

"really no matter how you look at it the fox body really had a better setup over the 3rd gen fbody for all out power."

That is not a statement of fact - it is an oppinion. So stop telling other people not to give their oppinion - because that is what this discussion is really about. Like I said: A solid case can be made for either car.
End rant.

------------------
Karl Hunter
Hunter Motorsports
Vancouver, B.C. CANADA

 

well i mean im not really going to get everyone to realize things, but in all honesty really i want you to expain to me exactly in what ways the 3rd gens unit body chassis, 7.5 rear ends and 305 are better then the fords 302, 8.8 rear and fox body chassis. sence i know nothing i would like you to enlighten me.

 

also there alot more then just the bore on 305 and 350, dont forget the 305 was made to be a smog emmisons engine and was never designed to be a power engine, aside from 45 more cubes and and larger journals its a much better engine over all, the 302 was designed to be a power engine back in the late 60's and has been sence then. the real problem with GM and mopar is they really never had a small cube engine that made alot of power, the 301 pontiac, 305 chevy and 307 olds were all just junky smog engines and were never ment to make power and they really dont. only engine was a 3.8 buick in the nationals but thats a whole diffrent story, and if the BW was such a good design, why did GM use the 8.5 ten bolt in the GN's and 442's? the G-body platform and 8/5 rears are a killer setup and GM got that right forsure

 

[QUOTE]sence i know nothing

Yup. Looks like you don't even know how to spell.

"the 305 was made to be a smog emmisons engine and was never designed to be a power engine"

I did not know you were part of the General Motors Design Team for the Small Block 305.

"aside from 45 more cubes and and larger journals its a much better engine over all"

Really??? In what ways? Larger journals - I don't think so. Have you assembled a Small Block lately? - EVER???


------------------
Karl Hunter
Hunter Motorsports
Vancouver, B.C. CANADA

 

man little kids your funny keep dreaming in your 16 second car

 

but agian what would you know, your just a stupid canadian, shouldnt you be talking frech?

 

In recent events, how can you put some body down because of where they are from. Being Canadian doesn't make him stupid, maybe spelling "French" right would make you a smarter person.



------------------
"Rice burners are like tampons...Every pu$$y has to have one"
'86 IROC
T-TOPS, TINTED WINDOWS, BRAKE LIGHT BLACKOUTS
GM GOODWRENCH 350
EDELBROCK TES HEADERS
3" Hooker CatBack w/Aero Chamber muffler
EDELBROCK 600CFM CARB.
KN AIRFILTER
ACCEL HEI DISTRIBUTOR
160* Stat, just switched to 180* b/c of winter coming and going to college in the mts.
3:73 Posi
Rebuilt 700R4
B&M Megashifter, 5" Autometer Tach w/shift lite

 

Sorry teach i don't use proper spelling and typing skills, as there going to be a test? LOL!

 

Keep this a Tech/comparison discussion and stop the BS now. If not I will make sure this gets locked and I really don't want that.

 

i agree, i dont see why those people started attacking me for no reason, but agian if anyone would like to answer my question above i would like that, thanks

 

Which??

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TempesT68:

but agian what would you know, your just a stupid canadian, shouldnt you be talking frech?

Well obviously this idiot is a prime example of why Canadian IQ's are a lot higher!!

 

Now, now - no need to continue with the nationality insults. That kind of stuff is not needed.

I really don't see a need to reply once someone makes comments like that, cause it justifies it in a way, and it tends to offend too many people.

This thread should probably be locked before it gets out of hand. It has gone so far off topic now that it really is poinless to continue.

------------------
Karl Hunter
Hunter Motorsports
Vancouver, B.C. CANADA

 

Yep, I agree, lock 'er down before we reach critical mass!

 

Critical mass = 25 Lbs 90% pure weapons grade plutonium


I agree on some points... the Mustang's engine and exhaust were thought out a lot better, I have driven my friend's GT and he has driven my 'bird, and we agreed that my car handled better and his car had more power... that's the real difference, Mustangs were made for goin' straight and F-bodies were made to corner well.

 

Third Gens were made to do everything good, and better if possible. Not really in the early 80's though, they weren't really concentrating on speed because of the economy, but later on they did with the L98's and LB9 5Speed's when they felt it was OK to bring some power back again. Alot of them were, and still are faster than the M*****gs of the same years. Their engines weren't better, they were easier. U are talking SBC here!! TPI might be a tougher setup to mess with but it definately has its advantages too.

 

LOL I just had to dig out this VERY OLD thread...

I was searching for opinions on 5.0 Mustangs... lolol

I read the whole thread and it was very funny...

My GF just bought a '90 Mustang GT 5.0 5 speed...I own a 91 Z28 L98 (t5 swap)

I had the chance to drive the Mustang around in the last few days...and I tell you mustang haters...this car is so much fun to drive!! But it is somehow completely different than an f-body, it's smaller, feels smaller, you sit different, but you got that 5 liter engine under the hood wich sounds very cool (stock replacement exhaust).

I too would say the f-body handles much better...and that the build quality of the GM car is above the Ford! the Mustang interior is somehow cheapo-plastic where the GM plastic feels better! The seats of the Mustang are in my opinion better that the stock Chevy seats.

I had the mustang on the car lift at work to look at it...I can say as a mechanic that it looks like the Mustang is the better car to work on. Dual exhaust is great and per example the intake design is simple and effective (but the TPI looks way better hehe).

I love my Camaro and would not trade it for a Mustang. the Z just looks way meaner and is bigger and flatter than a fox mustang...it just looks more like a gran turismo car!
But the idea of that "small" mustang with that big engine (at least here in europe it is big) is fine too! Like to drive it occasionally!

We should stick together with our american cars!
lets laugh at hondas and VW's hehe

lol im wondering if anyone reads this

 

i really cant see why everybody just doesnt want one of each... lol. they both have their ups and downs. i think that 350's have more potential than both the 302W or 351W when they are done up right. The mustangs i have and have had (an 1989 5.0 and my current 1996 4.6) have handled alot better stock than my camaros as far as cornering goes (1987 sport coupe and current 1985 iroc).

they both sound good, i personally think my camaro sounds a little better than my mustang.

IMO the bottom line is that they are both nice cars and you can have alot of fun in any of them

 

i really cant see why everybody just doesnt want one of each... lol.

Or more...... Then again, mine isn't technically referred to as a "Mustang"....