stang v. s2000
07-15-2003, 11:58 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Davie
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't now how the car the Mustang raced runs, but that mustang would be lucky to run low 15's with those mods. Now if it was a 5 speed, it could be a good running car.
That car with an aggresive shift kit can run right next to a 5 speed. And the LX runs high 14s stock (and thats conservative)....so why could't he run the s2k with those mods? He should be a mid to low 14 second car. I've seen S2k's run MID 15s at hte track!
its street racing...anythings possible...don't jump on the guys back!!Oh and 4 car lenghts approximately .4 seconds....big whoop.
07-16-2003, 05:48 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cuyahoga Falls
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So a shift kit makes up for the typical 20-30 rwhp loss from the inefficient Ford automatic? No.
I help out at a dyno shop and I live at the track. I know what I am talking about.
My primary meal when my car was stock was 5.0's and the automatic 5.0's were a joke. I was being generous with my guess of the times it ran.
I help out at a dyno shop and I live at the track. I know what I am talking about.
My primary meal when my car was stock was 5.0's and the automatic 5.0's were a joke. I was being generous with my guess of the times it ran.
07-16-2003, 10:39 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Davie
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by CANTONRACER
So a shift kit makes up for the typical 20-30 rwhp loss from the inefficient Ford automatic? No.
So a shift kit makes up for the typical 20-30 rwhp loss from the inefficient Ford automatic? No.
The shift kit is the answer to slow shifts....
And a stock 5.0 is a mid to high 14 second car...i know because before my 98, i owned a 91...
I never said that the 5.0 should decimate the the s2k...in fact, 7 times out of 10 it shouldn't beat it, but anything is possible on the street so i wouldn't call BS on his story
07-16-2003, 10:48 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cuyahoga Falls
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I said, 20-30 rwhp, being conservative when comparing an Ford auto to a Ford manual.
I see it all the time. Go post this on a Mustang site. Ask people who dyno their cars. It is not uncommon to see equally modded 5.0 Mustangs, one being an auto, the other a manual to be as much as a second slower. The guys with auto have to put good converters, good shift kits, gears just to run what the manuals were running stock.
You did not buy a 5.0 automatic for racing back in the day. My buds with Mustangs still cringe when you mention the performance of the automatic 5.0.
I see it all the time. Go post this on a Mustang site. Ask people who dyno their cars. It is not uncommon to see equally modded 5.0 Mustangs, one being an auto, the other a manual to be as much as a second slower. The guys with auto have to put good converters, good shift kits, gears just to run what the manuals were running stock.
You did not buy a 5.0 automatic for racing back in the day. My buds with Mustangs still cringe when you mention the performance of the automatic 5.0.
07-16-2003, 07:04 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Davie
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I said, 20-30 rwhp, being conservative when comparing an Ford auto to a Ford manual.
its not 20-30 rwhp...I told you already its a DYNO-proven 5-8 fwhp...the auto's drag in shift points and launch capabilities.but thats not my point...my point is why is everyone screaming BS when there are s2k's (driver's at least) who can't muster up a 15 second run?? Its the street...anything goes...maybe the s2k owner jumped late, or the mustang early...who knows.
07-16-2003, 07:16 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cuyahoga Falls
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dyno proven...which dyno? Dynojet, that is what I am talking about.
I don't know you and what your knowledge of cars is, but I will let you know about me.
I have had over 2000 1/4 passes.
Been racing hardcore for over 12 years.
Build my own engines, pretty much do everything on the cars, gears, transmissions, exhaust, etc...
Helped many friends with there cars, which many happen to be 5.0 Mustangs. The ones that had automatics got rid of them and went to 5 speeds.
Had many race cars, Mopars, Chevy's, Oldsmobile.
Seen numerous cars on chasis dyno. Setups, drivetrains,etc...
Again, mention 5.0 automatics to Mustangs guys, you get funny looks.
The Ford autos typically trapped 2-4 MPH lower than the 5 speeds. Why, power robbing Ford automatics.
Where do you think the typical manuals 12-15% drivetrain loss vs the typical automatics 15-20% drivetrain loss come from? The 4L60E that comes in the GM's is a very efficient automatic. It is not uncommon for Z28's to run identical wether auto or 6 speed. Not in the Ford world.
I am not making this stuff up.
I don't know you and what your knowledge of cars is, but I will let you know about me.
I have had over 2000 1/4 passes.
Been racing hardcore for over 12 years.
Build my own engines, pretty much do everything on the cars, gears, transmissions, exhaust, etc...
Helped many friends with there cars, which many happen to be 5.0 Mustangs. The ones that had automatics got rid of them and went to 5 speeds.
Had many race cars, Mopars, Chevy's, Oldsmobile.
Seen numerous cars on chasis dyno. Setups, drivetrains,etc...
Again, mention 5.0 automatics to Mustangs guys, you get funny looks.
The Ford autos typically trapped 2-4 MPH lower than the 5 speeds. Why, power robbing Ford automatics.
Where do you think the typical manuals 12-15% drivetrain loss vs the typical automatics 15-20% drivetrain loss come from? The 4L60E that comes in the GM's is a very efficient automatic. It is not uncommon for Z28's to run identical wether auto or 6 speed. Not in the Ford world.
I am not making this stuff up.
07-17-2003, 06:40 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Davie
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CANTONRACER
[B]Dyno proven...which dyno? Dynojet, that is what I am talking about.
I don't know you and what your knowledge of cars is, but I will let you know about me.
I have had over 2000 1/4 passes.
Been racing hardcore for over 12 years.
Build my own engines, pretty much do everything on the cars, gears, transmissions, exhaust, etc...
Helped many friends with there cars, which many happen to be 5.0 Mustangs. The ones that had automatics got rid of them and went to 5 speeds.
[B]Dyno proven...which dyno? Dynojet, that is what I am talking about.
I don't know you and what your knowledge of cars is, but I will let you know about me.
I have had over 2000 1/4 passes.
Been racing hardcore for over 12 years.
Build my own engines, pretty much do everything on the cars, gears, transmissions, exhaust, etc...
Helped many friends with there cars, which many happen to be 5.0 Mustangs. The ones that had automatics got rid of them and went to 5 speeds.
07-17-2003, 06:58 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by SoFlaNSX
Still haven't answered my question: why is it so hard to believe that a 5.0 aod beat an S2k?
Still haven't answered my question: why is it so hard to believe that a 5.0 aod beat an S2k?
302cid = 4.94liters
