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.

bought a 94 gt, seems sluggish

Old 10-11-2010, 12:10 AM
  #11  
interstate2006
 
interstate2006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: oregon
Posts: 42
Default snS

building a 94 5.0! takes a little more time, but can run a 12. nat. assperated!! w/ good gears and AODE. (as i have). just wanted to give a little in-put. THIS SIGHT IS AWSOME!!!!!!
interstate2006 is offline  
Old 10-11-2010, 12:57 AM
  #12  
Dj_Seph
4th Gear Member
 
Dj_Seph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,127
Default

Originally Posted by sn95_331_GT_ yellow
dont wanna break your heart but SN's are just slow to begin with...

and id LOVE to see a stock T5 SN run a low 14, i bet high 14's low 15's are all they have in them. mine went 14.4 with a little bit of work done, i think Adder's went in the 14.3-14.2 range with equal mods (had a better "HCI" than i did).

but OP, sorry, these things are dogs...
Haaah.

My fox went low 14s with stock engine and only 4.10 gears. ;D
Dj_Seph is offline  
Old 10-11-2010, 08:53 PM
  #13  
nitrous_bob
6th Gear Member
 
nitrous_bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: st clair shores MI
Posts: 6,028
Default

Originally Posted by sn95_331_GT_ yellow

and id LOVE to see a stock T5 SN run a low 14, i bet high 14's low 15's are all they have in them. mine went 14.4 with a little bit of work done,
i really dont see why not... my '90 aod vert went 15.10 and weighed 3600 lbs
my '89 notch went 13.20 with 4.10 and mickeys and 100k on it
my '88 notch went 14.20's street tires and 2.73's 100% stock and 125k
sn95 is NOT 1000 lbs heavier, and i know there is a lack of performance after '92 my '93 sixties better than '89 but about a 1/2 second slower but still 14.00 bone stock (exhaust was already on it)

anyways.... if i remember, we did 3.73 and a 125 shot on my buddies '95 and i think it ran 14.20's off the smack and 13.00 on it... that was like 15 years ago or some $h!t

but they are not that much slower... i'd say 2 tenths in power and another 2 tenths due to weight assuming you are comparing a t5 sn95 to a t5 foxbody hatch

Last edited by nitrous_bob; 10-11-2010 at 08:55 PM.
nitrous_bob is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 03:46 AM
  #14  
christopher_94_gt
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
christopher_94_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: alabama
Posts: 136
Default

thanks guys. checking timing getting tune up, gears are in near future, and as far as cams b303 is what im leaning toward. not sure yet, intake on its way **nitrous_bob, nic profile pic, the misfits are the ****.(danzig era)
christopher_94_gt is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 03:48 AM
  #15  
christopher_94_gt
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
christopher_94_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: alabama
Posts: 136
Default

would a 4.6 be a better car to work on> in your opinion, just want to know all your thoughts.
christopher_94_gt is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 08:16 AM
  #16  
sn95_331_GT_ yellow
5th Gear Member
 
sn95_331_GT_ yellow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 2,394
Default

Originally Posted by christopher_94_gt
would a 4.6 be a better car to work on> in your opinion, just want to know all your thoughts.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

no.

the black car is my buddies 98 GT.
after almost two years of it being down and with:
Fox Lake ported PI heads
Comp Cams (278AH, the biggest ones you can get)
TF intake manifold
75mm TB
95mm MAF
30#'s
longtubes, OR X, SLP LM1
aluminum flywheel (might or might not help)
and a bunch of other crap INCLUDING spending 2 weekends degreeing the goddamn cams because it HAD to be done...

it made a whopping 286rwhp and 279rwtq...

stick with a pushrod engine.
sn95_331_GT_ yellow is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 03:40 PM
  #17  
christopher_94_gt
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
christopher_94_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: alabama
Posts: 136
Default

thanks for the input, i got some buddies that have 95 gt's and 98 gt's and a few with 03-07 gt's and they all dog on my 5.0, but i would trade her for any 4.6, i love the original 302 and the 5 litre engines more than the 4.6, even if mines slower, (for now)
christopher_94_gt is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 03:43 PM
  #18  
christopher_94_gt
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
christopher_94_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: alabama
Posts: 136
Default

on the 94 gt, its what 215whp? and 285 ft/lb? and at 4xxxlb. im lookin forward to getting cams/intake/gears. and seeing what that does for her.
christopher_94_gt is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 06:51 PM
  #19  
95 5-0
 
95 5-0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4
Default

My gt had the same problem. Come to find out it was the torque converter. You said it was an automatic rite?
95 5-0 is offline  
Old 10-12-2010, 10:25 PM
  #20  
christopher_94_gt
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
christopher_94_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: alabama
Posts: 136
Default

yes its an auto, it has slight stutter sometimes but barely noticeable.
christopher_94_gt is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: bought a 94 gt, seems sluggish



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 AM.