finally went to the track - Page 2 - MustangForums.com

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

finally went to the track

Reply

 
 
 
Old 09-20-2009, 03:33 PM
  #11  
projectresto83
M.A.D. Motorsports
 
projectresto83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 8,012
Default

Yea you might think that. I think that gears have more to do with it in his situation.
projectresto83 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2009, 07:32 PM
  #12  
lxman1
4th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 1,326
Default

They both do, but weight is a consistent burden.
Gears also make a difference as does the different induction system. Then there is the clutch fan vs e-fan. Many variables.
My car stock with 2.73 gears was faster than a friends 89 with 3.08 gears. Not much but a little. Mine was speed density with lighter seats, his had MAF(restrictive stock) and heavier GT seats added to 5.0 LX cars in 89. Mine was consistently a 1/10th quicker in the 1/8 mile. Same driver.
lxman1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2009, 09:35 PM
  #13  
mustangsneverdie
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
mustangsneverdie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,624
Default

Originally Posted by lxman1 View Post
3 1/10th's were lost due to weight gain. Over 300lbs. Rule of thumb is 1/10th for every 100lbs.
how fast are you running now? and will the 3g pull anymore than the stock alt.
mustangsneverdie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2009, 09:41 PM
  #14  
mustangsneverdie
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
mustangsneverdie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,624
Default

mustangsneverdie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2009, 09:46 PM
  #15  
83gtragtop
5th Gear Member
 
83gtragtop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DTLA, CA
Posts: 4,897
Default

Originally Posted by lxman1 View Post
3 1/10th's were lost due to weight gain. Over 300lbs. Rule of thumb is 1/10th for every 100lbs.
This and the 3.08's pretty much explains it IMO. How did the '60's compare.
83gtragtop is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2009, 09:50 PM
  #16  
mustangsneverdie
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
mustangsneverdie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,624
Default

Originally Posted by 83gtragtop View Post
This and the 3.08's pretty much explains it IMO. How did the '60's compare.
best '60 in the 85 is in my sig.
best '60 for the 91 was 2.133 and it was actually spinning off the line
mustangsneverdie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2009, 03:39 AM
  #17  
Hollister Hoodlum
4th Gear Member
 
Hollister Hoodlum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wah-Cheeta, KS
Posts: 1,229
Default

Doesnt seem to bad at all...

My best from the time mine was at the track was a 14.44 at 92 with a 2.1650 60 ft.

3.08 gears with full exhaust and edelbrock rpm airgap intake. and 2 heavy as* 15" subs.
Hollister Hoodlum is offline  
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CS2007
Florida Regional Chapter
0
09-29-2015 01:06 PM
mungodrums
The New S550 2015-2020 Mustang
10
09-28-2015 11:54 PM
nmra1965
Other Professional Racing
0
09-26-2015 11:46 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: finally went to the track


Advertising
Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.