The Racers Bench Is the track just too much for you? Want to know what will beat what? Talk about it here!!

Stock for Stock which is faster??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-20-2012, 06:08 AM
  #31  
ctgreddy
6th Gear Member
 
ctgreddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dearborn, MI
Posts: 6,277
Default

now that's an ugly color combo^! haha.
ctgreddy is offline  
Old 02-20-2012, 10:13 AM
  #32  
Mishri
Mish-ogynist
 
Mishri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Helena, MT
Posts: 3,780
Default

Originally Posted by Stone629
Really? Na man, that hardly cuts it. One internet claim of this 12.2 glory pass is all it takes for you to believe that 5.0s are low 12 second cars stock?

That run might be legit (not likely), but its going to take a little more than you googling and finding a single claim to make me believe they're low 12 second cars stock, sorry.

These guys are on the same page as myself... http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...-73-gears.html
I agree, I found a lot of 5.0 guys were claiming stock runs but had used hand held tuners to adjust stuff like timing and rev limiter, i've seen several claim stock 12.2 then it comes out they either had drag radials or a tuner... bunch of douche bags

we might see a glory pass of a 12.2 on a 5.0, but i think mid 12s is a more realistic average good run.

I thought the 392 had it hands down over the 5.0 from things i was seeing online when they first came out, now i'd have to say it's close after the numbers you guys posted. and the 392 is still new, give it some time maybe we'll even see a 12.0 out of them. gotta hope they are faster if you are paying 15,000 more than a 5.0 price-wise they are closer to competing with a GT500.

Last edited by Mishri; 02-20-2012 at 10:16 AM.
Mishri is online now  
Old 02-20-2012, 10:47 AM
  #33  
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,193
Default

Sucks you can't tune the 392 cars right now from what I've read.
Riptide is offline  
Old 02-20-2012, 10:58 AM
  #34  
justinschmidt1
4th Gear Member
 
justinschmidt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Delawere
Posts: 1,334
Default

Originally Posted by Stone629
Really? Na man, that hardly cuts it. One internet claim of this 12.2 glory pass is all it takes for you to believe that 5.0s are low 12 second cars stock?

That run might be legit (not likely), but its going to take a little more than you googling and finding a single claim to make me believe they're low 12 second cars stock, sorry.

These guys are on the same page as myself... http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...-73-gears.html
Ok buddy, I dont really care, I didnt spend 9 days compiling a database of 5.0 1/4 mile times, I quickly searched on google and came across that.

....didnt a stock boss go 11.6x on drs?

Heres a stock 2011 with sticky tires and it went 12.12 @ 114.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVexXKJvQ_E

Plenty of these cars have gone mid 12s off the showroom floor...

add an awesome driver and some nice cool air at a fast track and 12.20s-12.30s seems very plausible to me


regardless off what you believe, a 392 srt8 vs a 5.0 is a drivers race and it could go either way

Last edited by justinschmidt1; 02-20-2012 at 11:01 AM.
justinschmidt1 is offline  
Old 02-20-2012, 02:12 PM
  #35  
Stone629
6th Gear Member
 
Stone629's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
Default

Thats great about the boss and the other 5.0s on tires, but we're talking about stock cars. Never said it wasn't impossible either, so take it easy. You think they're low 12 cars, fine. I don't. Mid 12s with above average drivers and good air from what I've seen.
Stone629 is offline  
Old 02-20-2012, 03:30 PM
  #36  
justinschmidt1
4th Gear Member
 
justinschmidt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Delawere
Posts: 1,334
Default

Originally Posted by Stone629
Thats great about the boss and the other 5.0s on tires, but we're talking about stock cars. Never said it wasn't impossible either, so take it easy. You think they're low 12 cars, fine. I don't. Mid 12s with above average drivers and good air from what I've seen.

I was saying what they are capable of because someone mentioned the 392 ran 12.3...but that is also under optimal conditions.

On average its a drivers race, simple as that.
justinschmidt1 is offline  
Old 02-26-2012, 02:02 PM
  #37  
TommyV8
5th Gear Member
 
TommyV8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 4,438
Default

The Challenger has 470 hp, nearly 160 more than the Mustang. The weight difference is about 500-600 lbs.
1. Challenger
2. Mustang
3. GTO
4. Camaro
5. Firehawk
TommyV8 is offline  
Old 02-26-2012, 02:27 PM
  #38  
3.0Taurass
3rd Gear Member
 
3.0Taurass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: OH
Posts: 850
Default

Originally Posted by TommyV8
The Challenger has 470 hp, nearly 160 more than the Mustang. The weight difference is about 500-600 lbs.
1. Challenger
2. Mustang
3. GTO
4. Camaro
5. Firehawk
You mean the challenger has nearly 60 more than the mustang. We're talking 2011+, not 2010
3.0Taurass is offline  
Old 02-26-2012, 02:28 PM
  #39  
bluebeastsrt
6th Gear Member
 
bluebeastsrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jersey
Posts: 11,565
Default

Of course the chally is fast. ANYTHING THAT SAYS SRT ON THE BACK IS STUPID FAST!
bluebeastsrt is offline  
Old 02-27-2012, 09:40 AM
  #40  
justinschmidt1
4th Gear Member
 
justinschmidt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Delawere
Posts: 1,334
Default

Originally Posted by TommyV8
The Challenger has 470 hp, nearly 160 more than the Mustang. The weight difference is about 500-600 lbs.
1. Challenger
2. Mustang
3. GTO
4. Camaro
5. Firehawk
Fail.
justinschmidt1 is offline  


Quick Reply: Stock for Stock which is faster??



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:32 AM.