5.0L General Discussion This section is for non-tech specific information pertaining to 5.0L Mustangs.

Disappointing Trip to the Track. Need Advice

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 05:43 PM
  #1  
87Stallion's Avatar
87Stallion
Thread Starter
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 630
From: ALberta
Default Disappointing Trip to the Track. Need Advice

As the title says my little stang didn't perform as I'd hoped.

My best time was 14.62 @ 95.09 MPH with a 2.1 60 FT.

Now granted I am @ 3200 ft above sea level and was running street radial tires.

I know drag radials would help alot. My mods are in my sig other than tubular u/l control arms and alum d-shaft. I am still running stock rockers. What can I do without changing major components to get a little quicker?

FYI.. the stock 5.0's were running 16's and 17's.
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 06:22 PM
  #2  
domindart's Avatar
domindart
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 740
From: atlanta Georgia
Default

Im wondering if maybe 3.55 is not a tall enough gear, but is there much of a difference going to 3.73? Im thinking theres a slight give and take of street / highway driving there, but not much. So in favor of highway driving the 3.55 would be beneficial. Anyways, heres what I was using-



http://www.corral.net/tech/gearcalc.html

BTW I think stock 5ohs should be running 14 , 15s
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 06:35 PM
  #3  
87Stallion's Avatar
87Stallion
Thread Starter
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 630
From: ALberta
Default

Stock 5.0's wont run 14's or 15's at 3200 ft above sea level.
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 06:43 PM
  #4  
AdderMk2's Avatar
AdderMk2
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,374
From: Lil' Rhody
Default

thats not bad for the elevation...

but its still not good
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 06:59 PM
  #5  
tinman's Avatar
tinman
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,103
From: Arizona
Default

I race ar high alitudes too.
One way to run good is to use gear than you think you need. I.E. if you think you need 3.73, use 4.10.
You also need to remember that if you are at 3200' statute, what was the air density. It can be 5500-6000 real easy.
If you know the density altitude then you can see what the performance should be at sea level.
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 07:03 PM
  #6  
67mustang302's Avatar
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,468
From: California
Default

Yeah, not only is it 3,200ft elevation, but it's August.
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 07:03 PM
  #7  
mjr46's Avatar
mjr46
D.R. THE PATHETIC DORK
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 30,871
From: West Virginia
Default

even at the elevation those times and mph are a little off for the mods you have
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 09:40 PM
  #8  
93 LX FiveO's Avatar
93 LX FiveO
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,664
From: Haverhill, MA
Default

how consistent were the times?

with that trap speed i dont think u will get out of the 14s
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 09:47 PM
  #9  
w8less's Avatar
w8less
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,396
From: KY
Default

Originally Posted by 87Stallion
As the title says my little stang didn't perform as I'd hoped.

My best time was 14.62 @ 95.09 MPH with a 2.1 60 FT.

Now granted I am @ 3200 ft above sea level and was running street radial tires.

I know drag radials would help alot. My mods are in my sig other than tubular u/l control arms and alum d-shaft. I am still running stock rockers. What can I do without changing major components to get a little quicker?

FYI.. the stock 5.0's were running 16's and 17's.

thats not helping your times any at all either
Old Aug 2, 2009 | 10:21 PM
  #10  
87Stallion's Avatar
87Stallion
Thread Starter
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 630
From: ALberta
Default

Originally Posted by mjr46
even at the elevation those times and mph are a little off for the mods you have
I did spin pretty bad through 1st and part of second. Any ideas where I can improve?. It didnt matter what RPM I launched at the times stayed between 14.6 and 14.75



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:31 PM.