300zx vs gt, winner?
04-03-2003, 09:37 PM
#12
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 16
300zx vs gt, winner?
LOL! you guys must be racing some crappy 300's. ive had two non-turbo 1990+ 300's, and one twin turbo. the non turbo 2seater i had ran 14.9@93 with nothing but exhaust and air intake, and the 2+2 model i had ran 15.1@94, but both of those were 5 speeds. the twin turbo would eat any stock mustang for breakfast running 13.6@106 bone stock. the only thing holding those cars back is a good driver, and a properly maintenenced engine.
maybe you guys are thinking about the older 80's model 300s??? either way i think a 94gt auto vs. a 90+300zx non turbo would be a pretty close race, but i'll say the gt should win, but not by much.
maybe you guys are thinking about the older 80's model 300s??? either way i think a 94gt auto vs. a 90+300zx non turbo would be a pretty close race, but i'll say the gt should win, but not by much.
04-04-2003, 02:33 PM
#13
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 363
300zx vs gt, winner?
my buddy had two non turbos, one auto, and one 5-speed. both simi quick, and he was a good driver with a properly maint. eng. however, his auto 90' would have been beaten by a stock 94' gt
04-08-2003, 01:32 AM
#18
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 16
300zx vs gt, winner?
<blockquote>Quote: Originally posted by DougBlevins on 07 April 2003<hr>
i feel sorry for a 5.0 owner that can't run a 14.9 like u say ur 300 zx ran
<hr></blockquote>
true, but its not gonna be as bad a loss stock vs. stock, as some of you are making it out to be. keep in mind the 94-95 5.0 is the slowest of the pack as far as the 5liter motor is concerened. with a good driver they usually can do high to mid 14's, with a lower trap speed than the z. the listed hp is 215, compared to the z's 222. i'll say it again, it should be a close race, but the stangs torque will win it off the line. the z will probably start pulling slightly on the upper end though, just not enough to make a difference in the 1/4.
i feel sorry for a 5.0 owner that can't run a 14.9 like u say ur 300 zx ran
<hr></blockquote>
true, but its not gonna be as bad a loss stock vs. stock, as some of you are making it out to be. keep in mind the 94-95 5.0 is the slowest of the pack as far as the 5liter motor is concerened. with a good driver they usually can do high to mid 14's, with a lower trap speed than the z. the listed hp is 215, compared to the z's 222. i'll say it again, it should be a close race, but the stangs torque will win it off the line. the z will probably start pulling slightly on the upper end though, just not enough to make a difference in the 1/4.
04-08-2003, 03:30 PM
#19
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 72
300zx vs gt, winner?
u got that right, the '94 and '95 breed of mustangs w/ the horizonal tail lights r the mark of the beast. although the new body style from the fox mustang did look good, they were very sick in the performance department. if u do the same stuff to a '93 that u do to a '94 5.0, the '93 will b much quicker.
