5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-20-2005, 04:08 PM
  #11  
Aixtreme89
5th Gear Member
 
Aixtreme89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 2,034
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

Sorry I ment to say Honda CRX's weigh 2000lbs. with driver, not 200.
Aixtreme89 is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 04:17 PM
  #12  
Ezrider
2nd Gear Member
 
Ezrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 294
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

the civic is heavyer than the crx
Ezrider is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 04:22 PM
  #13  
Aixtreme89
5th Gear Member
 
Aixtreme89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 2,034
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

Depending on what year and model civic it is, depends on the wieght. Example a 95 Civic Si hatchback is 2390 with out driver and probably 2590 with the driver so with at same turbo 1.8liter. THats 9.25lbs. per 1 horsepower. So still that beats 10.6lbs per horsepower with the mustang. Sorry to bring a reality check to this.
Aixtreme89 is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 04:36 PM
  #14  
Ezrider
2nd Gear Member
 
Ezrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 294
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

well theres other things to look at as well, such as traction, this is where the front wheel drive is gonna hurt, and even if the civic wins i would rather drive a rust bucket dodge ford or chevy
Ezrider is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 04:40 PM
  #15  
Aixtreme89
5th Gear Member
 
Aixtreme89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 2,034
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

This is true, I would never drive a front wheel drive car. They are not sport cars. A bigger engine has much more potential. Thats why I own two mustangs myself.
Aixtreme89 is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 04:44 PM
  #16  
Ezrider
2nd Gear Member
 
Ezrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 294
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

also i love the twistys, fwd dosent like the twistys unless you realy like cornering on 3 wheels, steering breaking and acellerating are to much for one set of tires. the mustang flexes to much but im hoping to solve that with some subframe connectors and strut tower braces. but even as it is its alot better than any front wheel drive
Ezrider is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 06:13 PM
  #17  
90Mustangfan
I ♥ Acer
 
90Mustangfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,259
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

When I went to the track a while back I beat a late 80's early 90's honda with a B-16 running 8psi of boost, i beat him pretty good, he beat be 1 time also( I think i missed a shift or late start).
90Mustangfan is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 06:32 PM
  #18  
bc_stang
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
bc_stang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: vancouver,bc,canada
Posts: 97
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??


ORIGINAL: 90Mustangfan

When I went to the track a while back I beat a late 80's early 90's honda with a B-16 running 8psi of boost, i beat him pretty good, he beat be 1 time also( I think i missed a shift or late start).
ya but the prob is this guy is building b-18,which is 1.8 l..same engine outta i believe 98-99 crv's.twin overhead cam with v-tec
this guy is running 91 civic hatchback which i believe according to him about 2500lbs no driver.as far as i know there no nitrous.as someone already said i think it really comes down to frt wheel drive and rear wheel drive car.i have seen 400hp to ground civics running low 12's so iam sure its pretty hard to get some traction outta those things.i mentioned that a good 347 stroker would get u into low 12 andbreak in high 11's and he did admit that the fastest civic hes seen so far is 11.8 so far...thats with slicks and sh*t load of suspension work done with no rear seats,carpets, rear bumper!!!
iam confident in my buildup and gonna wait till i get decent slicks or atleast cheaters before i race him.i dont think he stands a chance ...doest matter howmuch power u got it all comes down to traction and frt wheel drive have that disadvantage to begin with..
could someone tell how much 87-93 lx coupes weigh?
bc_stang is offline  
Old 02-21-2005, 01:38 PM
  #19  
90Mustangfan
I ♥ Acer
 
90Mustangfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,259
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

3,000lbs,....3100 with driver.
90Mustangfan is offline  
Old 02-21-2005, 04:38 PM
  #20  
Dbeck002
I ♥ Acer
 
Dbeck002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,802
Default RE: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??

a little more, LX coupes weigh about 3200 without driver.

3400 with driver.

you have nothing to worry about dude your gonna stomp his lil ***...

347 well fed can eat anything on the road. and if i were you id go with 11:1 compression and make 500 HP just for sh-ts and giggles.
Dbeck002 is offline  


Quick Reply: turbo honda vs 347 stroker comparison??



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:20 AM.