Hey guys.... I'm wondering if anyone that has taken thier Mustang to a drag strip when it was stock... can let me know what times they where getting..

Everyone is telling me that Fox bodies and GT's made all the way up until the new body style came out run mid to low 14's stock...

I personally know this to be BS (unless there has been something wrong with EVERY Mustang I've ever drivin or raced...)

I drive my dads 86 Mustang LX 5.0 HO 5-speed all the time..... the thing runs like a top and it's a mid 15 second car.... and so is every non SVT or Shelby mustang I've ever came across until the new body style came out (stock of course and I'm obviousley not even taking 6 or 4 cylinders into the eqation)

Can anyone TRUTHFULLY either back me up or proove me wrong on this... I have as much experience with Mustangs as a lot of people that have one in thier driveway and I'm basing this on what I've actually seen... not what I've heard or believe to be true.....

thanks...

Stock Mustang? Do they even exist?

I ran my buddies 02 GT, stock to the air filter, at the track, best of a 14.2 with it. My buddy with mufflers and intake ran a 14.0 in a 93 LX. Friends dad with a 94 or 95 GT, bone stock, ran a best of a 14.8.

Basically it was mid to low 14's from 90-93, low 15's to high 14's from 94-98, and back down into the low 14's from 99 to 04.

O noes!

the older fox 5.0 5 speed (89-93) non convertible can* run a high 14 stock. but that is assuming they are in top shape. good tires, good shocks, good bushings, good state of tune. it has the powerto weight ratio, it just that most of them are older and parts thathaveworn out have been replaced with high performance pieces. but honestly, I can say I have seen a STOCK 90 5.0 lx hatchback 5 speed run a 14.8.

when my 92' was stock I ran a 15.2 @ 93.something on futura tires, rotted rear sus, and a rotted trans mound. so that alone should tell you that on a well running stock 5.0 mid 14's are but a tire change away.

as far as 96-98 GT's I have been told you can get 14.4 out of them stock. but I have never seen it. as a matter of fact, when my 92' was bolt on only I would hang next to 96-98's with similar mods.

as far as 99-04.........YES.


------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Those so naive, so hard headed, so narcissistic, that think that buy their own efforts can single handedly change the world, are always the ones that do.

alot will vary with weather and trac conditions also

ive seen stock fox's run mid 14's

The 1986-93 LX 5.0 Mustang are all high 14 and low 15 second cars, with the GT's and convertibles not hitting better than a 15.1.

I have a hard time believing that the 96-98 4.6's were faster than a 5.0. They were just sad. Also heavier.

How can a 5.0 not run a low 14? They're roughly 2900-3000 and put down 200WHP stock.

O noes!

Musclecar Review couldn't get a better time than 14.8 out of a stock 1988 Mustang Coupe that weighed 2700lbs. However, every 100lbs counts for around 1/10th of a second. So a 3300lbs convertible would do it in like... 15.4, which is pretty close to the actual quarter of that car. Same with a Mustang GT from 1996. It's about 215 and 3200lbs, so the quarter was about 15.3-15.2

Most truly stock Mustangs (and by stock I mean STOCK, like it has to have the original tires) from 1986 to 1995 only did the quarter in around 15 seconds. It wasn't until the SOHC Modular V8 rated at 215hp for 1996-98 and 260hp in 1999-04 (Who were probably close to 260hp in 1996-98 and 300hp in 1999-2004, but purposefully kept low to make the SVT Stangs seem much faster) that it began to have low-mid 14 numbers.

Everybody likes to brag that the Mustang was a low 13 second car, but that's like how everyone says that all the old Musclecars were 13 second cars. It's just BS and selective memory. 80's Mustangs weren't much faster than a stock Cobalt SS, but they were much more dramatic. All that V8 noise and tire smoke and torque counts for a lot when you think about it.

Ha there is no way the 4.6 2v was close to 300 from factory. You're nuts. Underrated? They're just fat and thusly slow. The new style GT's with the 3v's run mid to high 13's on a good track, and that's with a heavier car and 300 real HP.

I'm not living in the old glory days. I was there watching them run these times. Hell I drove the 02 that ran the 14.2

Mag race all you want. The real world, with real power shifts, and real hard launches, is vastly different.

O noes!

a buddy of mine has a 90 GT, with exhaust and maybe a cone filter, AOD trans, and he runs 15.0's, maybe 14.90's on a real cool night.

the AOD was a sad....sad transmission.

the turbo 5.0 guys love them for the tall first gear but other than that, and aod mustang will be slower than a similarly modded 5 speed by alot.


------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Those so naive, so hard headed, so narcissistic, that think that buy their own efforts can single handedly change the world, are always the ones that do.

Fox Bodies vary with times. Most are going to be in the mid 15's though. I've seen some magazines or other online sources rate some of the mid-late 80's Stangs as being in the mid-high14's. The SN95's with both the 5.0 and the non-PI 4.6 were high 14's at best with a 5speed. They were very sad for V8 "Muscle Cars." I have witnesses to my bone stock 2000 Z24 takin' down some of the 94-98 GT's. The "New Edge" SN95's (99-04) GT's are a mid-low 14 second car. They feel faster than they really are though. I just rode in my best friend's new 04 GT with just catback and TB spacer last night. It feels faster than his cammed 99 Cobra did even though the Cobra was a good second and a half faster in the 1/4, atleast. I don't know why the PI 2v's feel so much faster than they really are.



98 Trans Am
6.0, L92 heads, LS3 intake, TSP 231/236 cam, and much more

Odd.... if all this is true... than something strange is going on....

My dad and I run our cars againt eachother every once in a while.. and every time we both pull at the exactly same speed every time... and his car is like new...

I've raced a few other mid to late 90's GT's also and I always either sit besides them like we where bolted together, or I pull head a little until I hit 3rd... and keep about a fender lenght on them...

I would assume that I've alsways just been a much better driver in these cases exept for the fact that when we have both launched the same (even with eachother) and niether of us are missing gears.... the guy in the Mustange never pulls on me... it's always like we are driving the exact same car.....

So WTF is going on then..... I don't get it... can anyone else explain why this happens every time?

I'm not bragging... I really am honestly just trying to fiqure this out.

I would race the bone stock 94 GT, and would beat him out of the hole everytime for some reason, guess he was launching it easy. I'd stay about a car ahead, but once I hit third he walked on past me to the finish line. I was running 15.3's all night long that night. He would run a 14.9 or so. This was in my 96 Z24 with a redneck made intake as the only real power mod at the time.

O noes!

Weebel wrote:Odd.... if all this is true... than something strange is going on....

My dad and I run our cars againt eachother every once in a while.. and every time we both pull at the exactly same speed every time... and his car is like new...

I've raced a few other mid to late 90's GT's also and I always either sit besides them like we where bolted together, or I pull head a little until I hit 3rd... and keep about a fender lenght on them...

I would assume that I've alsways just been a much better driver in these cases exept for the fact that when we have both launched the same (even with eachother) and niether of us are missing gears.... the guy in the Mustange never pulls on me... it's always like we are driving the exact same car.....

So WTF is going on then..... I don't get it... can anyone else explain why this happens every time?

I'm not bragging... I really am honestly just trying to fiqure this out.

your car is much lighter and is fwd
less drive train loss

a friend of mine has an 04 mach 1 stang with an exhaust. he ran a 13.2 on the final race day at the local track



Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!

Ahem, GTs...



05 M6 YJ GTO 1 of 447 12.523@111.30

99redz24 wrote:a friend of mine has an 04 mach 1 stang with an exhaust. he ran a 13.2 on the final race day at the local track

A Mach 1 has the 4v 4.6 DOHC motor though. That's quite a difference compared to the 2v 4.6 motor in the GT's. Like a 40-60hp difference. And both of those are a lot faster than 5.0 Fox Bodies and SN95's.



98 Trans Am
6.0, L92 heads, LS3 intake, TSP 231/236 cam, and much more

1998 GT 4.6L Convertible 5 speed. It's my moms. I ran a 15.4 at the drag strip and I believe it has a high 14 second pass in it. I only made two passes and it was my first time racing a RWD. Car also has 100,000+ miles when I ran it. She now has a Steeda intake installed and Steeda UD pulleys I need to install next year. Next year it'll certainly see 14's


Best quarter mile to date - 15.750 @ 85.82
**CHECK MY CAR PROFILE, I HAVE STUFF FOR
SALE AS WELL AS THE CAR,PLEASE PM
ME WITH INTEREST IN ANYTHING
I'M SELLING. THANKS!**

^^^Sorry, but a convertible non-PI 2v GT won't see 14's when it's stock unless either Evan Smith or God, himself, is driving it.



98 Trans Am
6.0, L92 heads, LS3 intake, TSP 231/236 cam, and much more

tspence45 wrote:^^^Sorry, but a convertible non-PI 2v GT won't see 14's when it's stock unless either Evan Smith or God, himself, is driving it.

I'll find out next year. I spun horribly off the line both times down the track with it.


Best quarter mile to date - 15.750 @ 85.82
**CHECK MY CAR PROFILE, I HAVE STUFF FOR
SALE AS WELL AS THE CAR,PLEASE PM
ME WITH INTEREST IN ANYTHING
I'M SELLING. THANKS!**

^^^ but its not stock anymore



05 M6 YJ GTO 1 of 447 12.523@111.30

I will be getting times and dyno numbers from mine this spring. There is nothing stock about it, but you will see numbers from my 97 GT vert lol.


On the other hand....you have other fingers.

The Redneck wrote:my 88 camaro is on blocks trying to become a race car,
redneck is a state of mind

5.0 mustangs are mid 14 second cars stock, I know because I own one.

Project Crash Pattern wrote:5.0 mustangs are mid 14 second cars stock, I know because I own one.

You own an automatic convertible 87 Fox Body. Your car is nowhere near a mid 14 second car. Your car would be lucky to be in the 15's.



98 Trans Am
6.0, L92 heads, LS3 intake, TSP 231/236 cam, and much more

tspence45 wrote:

Project Crash Pattern wrote:5.0 mustangs are mid 14 second cars stock, I know because I own one.

You own an automatic convertible 87 Fox Body. Your car is nowhere near a mid 14 second car. Your car would be lucky to be in the 15's.

alright let me clarify. a stock 5.0 notch 5spd will definitely run mid 14 seconds, they tested a stock 87 hatchback in hot rod magazine it ran a 14.6@96, in automobile magazine it ran a 14.4 @96. 14.8 @ 94.3 mph in road and track. those are 3 sources proving they are mid-high 14 second cars stock. the 5.0 Verts run slower because of taller gearing + more weight