do bone stock 88 mustang gt's run 13.9

this loud mouth kid is talking crap to my friend saying he is bone stock and runs a 13.995 i thought they were 14.6-15.3 range

Depends on what his definition of stock is. I really don't think an 88 5.0 could run those times straight off the showroom floor.

he has headers x-pipe and thats it on street tires 5spd with 3.08 gears

Not bone stock. With headers and a x-pipe along with a set of slicks and skinnies I think it could be done...it would take a hell of a 60' though cause w/full exhaust those cars are only trapping 95-96 mph. I'm sure SteveY and Scott9050 will chime in a say they run 13s stock. ;) I have never seen a stock 5.0 run anywhere near 13s - morel ike 14.7-15.6 depending on year/tranny.

Originally posted by amean94ta
he has headers x-pipe and thats it on street tires 5spd with 3.08 gears

Technically thats not stock ;) Plus I would *think* from my experience that it would take more than that to get one of those cars into the 13.99 range. But that is my guess from what I have seen....

There are always factory freaks, BlackHatch's stock Fox went like 14.2X So they exist...

Has he got slips to prove his claim?

Highly unlikely, but i have heard some guys either do it or get damn close w/ good tires...

Unfortunatley I was never able to run completley stock, as my stock h-pipe was in dire need of replacement when I bought the car.

With just the o/r h-pipe though I was able to click off some 13.9's on the stock width street tires (dunlops) and the stock 2.73's.

Granted I do have quite a weight advantage over gt's and even the lx hatches.

With that being said, if he does have aftermarket headers and a x-pipe I could see one clicking off some 13.9's with the 3.08s'.

If he's telling you the truth, just ask to see his timeslips. I know I always keep my best ones in my glovebox:D.

EDIT: I forgot to mention my times were run on my stock 160,000 mile engine, drivetrain, suspension etc.

I now own a fox (1993 LX notch) 5.0, and in a lot of research, it isn't likely, but there have been more than a few. it's also entirely possible that the car has some mods without him knowing. A ported lower, underdrives can be put on an virtually undetectable. With Long tubes and an X then yeah, I've heard of more than one guy pulling 13's with those mods.

The mustang is a lot about driver and 60'. I've never seen the ET's with such low traps (and I am used to AWD cars!) Course most stangs on the street have good traps and crap ET's :)

Originally posted by Kris93/95Z28
Technically thats not stock ;) Plus I would *think* from my experience that it would take more than that to get one of those cars into the 13.99 range. But that is my guess from what I have seen....

There are always factory freaks, BlackHatch's stock Fox went like 13.2X So they exist...

Has he got slips to prove his claim?

Actually the stang hasn't gone 13.2's...that was the nearly stock Z that did that.

Stang ran low low 14's with a very ****ty sixty foot time. The traction lock is burned up so my 60ft time was like the 2.3 range and mph was around 98.

That was a completely stock mustang down to the paper air filter and stock air silencer. Stock exhaust, timing, etc.

Mike 92LX was there at the track with me and saw the runs as a couple of other Tealnet.com members.

Originally posted by 97bowtie
Not bone stock. With headers and a x-pipe along with a set of slicks and skinnies I think it could be done...it would take a hell of a 60' though cause w/full exhaust those cars are only trapping 95-96 mph.

I agree. Maybe add 3.73 gears too, to get there.

I'm sure SteveY and Scott9050 will chime in a say they run 13s stock. ;)

:(

I have never seen a stock 5.0 run anywhere near 13s - morel ike 14.7-15.6 depending on year/tranny.

That's about right for what I've seen.

Maybe it is possible to run a 13.9 stock, but it is like the high 12 second LS1 or my car running 13.6 stock, very unlikely and very unusual.

I forget exactly which year, but I think it was 88, wasn't their a few mustangs made that were stripper cars. Had no accesories, or you could order them like that. I believe one of the mags tested one of the stripper cars and got a 13 sec run out of it.

Originally posted by Sax1031
I forget exactly which year, but I think it was 88, wasn't their a few mustangs made that were stripper cars. Had no accesories, or you could order them like that. I believe one of the mags tested one of the stripper cars and got a 13 sec run out of it.

It was a stripped notch back with no power accersories, no ac no radio etc...

They called them the "sleepers" because it was a stock class car "no mods" but could run pretty hard

I have an old edition of Mustangs and Fast fords where they chronicled the 5.0L history....pretty good read I will dig it up and get the trap

Originally posted by BlackHatch
Actually the stang hasn't gone 13.2's...that was the nearly stock Z that did that.

Stang ran low low 14's with a very ****ty sixty foot time. The traction lock is burned up so my 60ft time was like the 2.3 range and mph was around 98.

That was a completely stock mustang down to the paper air filter and stock air silencer. Stock exhaust, timing, etc.

Mike 92LX was there at the track with me and saw the runs as a couple of other Tealnet.com members.

yeah sorry about that I meant low 14s....
I guess I was half asleep when I posted that... lol
I edited it, before the bs flags start rising ;)

i have a friend that has a 92 gt, auto, that says he could beat a z28....what would his car run, also he has 100,000 on the clock, and bone stock.

Originally posted by PoloGreen 3.4
i have a friend that has a 92 gt, auto, that says he could beat a z28....what would his car run, also he has 100,000 on the clock, and bone stock.

Depends on what year z28. Just know that his car's not fast. ;)

The only 5.0 that I actually saw race ran a 17flat.... I heard the average was typically like 15.2 with the occasional 14 second one.... Tell the kid to prove it or shut up :D

Originally posted by smokin5s
The only 5.0 that I actually saw race ran a 17flat.... I heard the average was typically like 15.2 with the occasional 14 second one.... Tell the kid to prove it or shut up :D I agree. Since everyone I know has a fox 15.2 is about right for a stock 5.0. One of my best friends has a 90 GT 5spd and ran 15.2. 14.8 on ET Streets. My other friend's 88 GT 5spd ran 14.8 with ORH-pipe and shorty headers. My other friends 87 GT ran about 15.0 stock too. But my friend's old 89 GT ran 14.0 with cai, full exhaust and 3.55s. I think it can be done with 3.08s though.

My father ran 8.70s-8.80s in the 1/8 in our 90 Hactback 5.0 when it just had 3.55 gears and exhaust.

Well I have alot of experiance in this field also.

The fastest "stock" GT has actually gone low 13's @ over 100mph.

That was with 4:10's and tires.

All these legendary fast times from stock or nearly stock 5.0s:rolleyes:. I am not calling bs, but I have never been beat by a stock or mildly modded 5.0 in my car. This includes LX 5.0 5-speeds with gears, pulleys, full exhaust, K&N, drag radials, etc. These guys can drive, too. I always pull them from any speed. Sometimes with sticky tires they will get me out of the hole but I will always reel them in by the 1/8 mile or so.

Steve Y- You have to remember that the times from our nearly stock 5.0(gears and exhaust) came in about the best track and weather conditions. Good ole South Carolina and sea level with perfect weather. Also my father has been a mechanic, owned a machine shop for years, and raced for 25+years. He is awesome in a car driving. Same reason that he got his 00 GT with a k&n airfilter to run a 13.7x with a 100-101mph trapspeed.

Now the car has simple heads and cam package with bolt-ons and a little suspension work and runs 7.7x's in the 1/8 with slicks.

I seen a 89 mustang BONE stock 5 Speed run a 13.98 @99 mph. I ran againts him in my 85 camaro and I ran a 14.3 @ 97 but I was modded with a new engine. He had factory exhaust, Intake, suspension. He did have slicks but its still stock to me.

Just like they had a Bone Stock 98 Z28 run High 12's:bow:

Originally posted by camaro98z28
I seen a 89 mustang BONE stock 5 Speed run a 13.98 @99 mph. He did have slicks but its still stock to me.



Stock means how it came from the factory. Full tank of gas, spare, jack, etc. Paper filter and stock street tires. Also whatever octane gas the owner's manual recommends.

Originally posted by AceTalon
Well I have alot of experiance in this field also.

The fastest "stock" GT has actually gone low 13's @ over 100mph.

That was with 4:10's and tires.

:confused: 4.10s, and tires implies MODIFIED, not stock.

Plus how much did the car weigh, etc?
I'm sorry, I just can't see a "100% stock, NO sticky tires, NO Non-factory Gear ratios, NO free mods, Stock timing , Factory suspension, etc...etc.... A Stock, GT going low 13s seems very unlikely to me. I am not saying it was impossible, Juts more details about the car are needed.

The issue of what stock is tp some people pisses me off.... Case and point, GM High Tech Performance had an Issue that said on the cover, Budget Bomber: Stone Stock LT1 goes 12.26! <- Well It wasn't stock. It had a lot of stuff done, most of the interior pulled, a convertor, etc..., but the valve train and heads were "Stock". So that makes the Car stock? What a bunch of BS... Yes the car was fast, and yes It ran good, but Stock? Hardly....

Originally posted by Steve Y
Stock means how it came from the factory. Full tank of gas, spare, jack, etc. Paper filter and stock street tires. Also whatever octane gas the owner's manual recommends.

I would agree with that:thumb:

You see it way to often.

There are a couple of guys that frequent the track that bring a "stock" 88 lx hatchback. Well, it cliks off some 13.6's at right around 101mph..."BONE STOCK!":rolleyes:. Well, I just agree and try to ignore the bs in the conversation. Come to find out, bone stock to them means full exhaust including headers, smog delete, a/c delete, et streets, skinnies up front etc. Some people just dont know the meaning of "bone stock" anymore.

I've never claimed that I ran 13.9's "bone stock". It's unfortunate that when I bought the car the h-pipe was in such a bad condition. Even so, I'm confindant that if the car would have been bone stock, with under 50k miles on it (well maintained of course)...that I would have been able to click off some similar times (13.9's that is).

The lx notches with NO ac, radio, power windos and locks, power steering. That were 5 spd were like 2800-3000 pounds. Thats how they ran that fast. And some cars came with diffrent tires.

Kinda like with the camaro, some z rated some with lower ratings ect ect.

Originally posted by camaro dreamer
The lx notches with NO ac, radio, power windos and locks, power steering. That were 5 spd were like 2800-3000 pounds. Thats how they ran that fast. And some cars came with diffrent tires.

Kinda like with the camaro, some z rated some with lower ratings ect ect.

All foxbodys came with power steering. The stripper was a option, and they were a bit lighter than the average notch. Mine has power windows/locks/mirrors, ac, factory upgraged stereo:rolleyes: etc. Without the spare tire and jack (I take them out at the track, but do not gain any et or mph from it) and 1/4 tank of fuel I weigh in at 3018 lbs without me, without the smog pump or cats, but with heavier 17"X8" rims and tires. Strippers should have no problems dipping into the sub 3000 range.

Originally posted by PoloGreen 3.4
i have a friend that has a 92 gt, auto, that says he could beat a z28....what would his car run, also he has 100,000 on the clock, and bone stock.

if hes implying that he could beat a 4th gen Z28 hes smoking some good stuff.....

a 92 GT is not exactly a speed demon....crappy gears, crappy tranny and the heaviest body style offered (excpet the GT vert. of course) id look for 15.3-15.5s out of that thing...

I too have never seen any stock 5.0 run any quicker than mid 14s, and I've seen plenty ;)

Some people can get their Fox's to go quick with very little, but a tried and true way to hit 13's is with a H-pipe, cat-back, "10 minute tune up", 3.55s and sticky tires. As long as its not a conv. AOD even a bad driver should be in the 13s with that.

OK guys I know this kid better than amean94ta(sean) , this kid have H-pipe, flowmasters mufflers witn no tips , just dumps , he have CAI, thats it , I saw time slip , 13.5- 13.7 , I can't belive , and he and amean94ta raced on street , and I think kid won, right Sean

A friend of mine has a 87 GT 5spd with 2.73 gears. With an offroad H pipe and turn downs he went 13.98. Everything else was stock right down to the crappy 235 street tires. I even have it on video. I wouldn't worry though this is certainly not the norm for foxbody's.

LOL....this comes up every year or so on this Forum or some other. The typical responses are "I've never seen a stock GT/LX/Whatever go 13.9x bone stock (or whatever) so it didn't happen". They all run 14.5 or worse. I suppose if you, you, and you didn't see it, then it just didn't and doesn't happen.

Spring 88 issue of "Cars Illustrated" chronicled Tony Defeo's (sp) bone stock 87 LX Hatch running 13.9x @ 98 mph. No, that's not a GT - but the hatch is likely only 50-ish or so lbs lighter. Stock tires, stock filter, stock everything. The term "free mods" hadn't even been invented back then, nor had "10 minute tune-up" for those that know what I'm referring to. It was a STOCK LX.

There are a handful of others that have done it. My personal car came close, but it never was run in 100% bone stock trim (I had a worthless chip and different tires - not slicks, cheaters, or DRs...which hadn't been invented in 1988). It was a lightweight notchback, but hardly "stripped". For the curious, click on this link: http://members.cox.net/bobcosby/stang/chrono.html

There are others that claim they will outrun fox Mustangs with "all the bolt-ons" and they run no better than mid 13's. Good job, because there are several of us that have gone deep into the 12's with just bolt-ons, gears, and slicks. Is that normal? No - but it is possible.

Like others have said, definitely not the norm but it has been done.

But chances are this kid is just pulling your leg. I usually take everything loud-mouthed kids say with a grain of salt. Peek under the hood, and ask for slips or a race and see if he's as fast as he says he it.

Originally posted by RiceEating5.0
Like others have said, definitely not the norm but it has been done.

But chances are this kid is just pulling your leg. I usually take everything loud-mouthed kids say with a grain of salt. Peek under the hood, and ask for slips or a race and see if he's as fast as he says he it.

Guys I again say , that guy show me slips , he runn 13.6

we did race about 2 months ago and with my transmission shot he was right next to me and the week before i did take it to the track with the trans shot:D and put down repeated 14.001:( so it does atleast ron 14.00 flat we went about 8 times across 12th street and it depended on launch and traction to who edged the other out

I think this 88 Mustang guy run midl 13s , but he lie about "stock" car :yuck:

My friend's 93 GT 5-speed ran a 14.6 & a 14.7 in the 1/4, with shorty headers, exhaust, UD pulleys, and some other mods. An 85 GT (carbed) consistently ran low 15's with many mods, and a '00 ran a best of 14.6 with only CAI, and exhaust.

If its an 88 then its probably a speed density car, and with just minor exhaust and especially less fuel pressure, then yes, its easily possible. The speed density cars run much harder stock than the mass air cars. My buddy had an 87 GT with catback that went 14.00 on stock 225 tires at Cordova, which a notoriously crappy track.

A few years ago my friend in a no power window, no A/C Mustang LX went 13.8xx in Sacramento raceway with only the timming turned up ( I think it was 14 deg. init. ) and a homemade "dryer ducting" cold air, and a short belt. So I totally believe it after seeing the run my friend made.

Simply amazing how many stock 5.0's are still around especially with free mods floating around.

Only on the internet do these cars run these times...or someone forgets to mention -5000 DA...

Eeerr? My car made the runs specified back in 1989 and 1994. Tony's car went 13.9 in 1988.

I can't talk to anybody elses car.

All I know is in Ohio, which happens to be on a mountain with all tracks going uphill, the stock GT and LX's run mid 14's and slower with very good drivers working them.

Argue all you want, but the fact is the only place I ever have heard of these cars running these times is on the internet.

I have a bud that bought a 87 LX 5 speed. Strong car, ran low 14's and we all thought the car was stock. Went to advance the timing...done already. Bought a pulley...already on it...but until he realized this, who knows how many people he told that it was stock. Some guy sold it to a dealer and as far as they knew, it was stock.

It would be no different that me slapping my car together with parts laying around and selling it to a young kid. Car looks bone stock, sounds stock, as far as anyone knows, it is stock, but it happens to be running low 13's. Guess it must be stock.

Take my fiance's dad, he has a 88 GT 5.0 speed. This is the only 5.0 that I have ever seen that is actually stock. He has never modified it at all and the car is like maybe 40000 miles, perfect running, good plugs, etc...ran a best et of 14.8@93 MPH. Could be driver..but I guess he had a harder time in his GT than his high 8 second 4 speed drag car?

A guy i use to work with had a 90 5.0 Hatch 5spd with about 80k miles on it. We raced and he only beat my BMW to 100mph by about 3-4 car's. Wich would still put him in the low 15's. This 5.0 was in great shape too. This was a few years ago and im not sure what gears or anything, But i know it was stock and in the best shape of any 5.0 i have ever seen. I thought he would have destroyed me but it was closer then i thought.

Originally posted by CANTONRACER
All I know is in Ohio, which happens to be on a mountain with all tracks going uphill, the stock GT and LX's run mid 14's and slower with very good drivers working them.

Argue all you want, but the fact is the only place I ever have heard of these cars running these times is on the internet.

I have a bud that bought a 87 LX 5 speed. Strong car, ran low 14's and we all thought the car was stock. Went to advance the timing...done already. Bought a pulley...already on it...but until he realized this, who knows how many people he told that it was stock. Some guy sold it to a dealer and as far as they knew, it was stock.

It would be no different that me slapping my car together with parts laying around and selling it to a young kid. Car looks bone stock, sounds stock, as far as anyone knows, it is stock, but it happens to be running low 13's. Guess it must be stock.

Take my fiance's dad, he has a 88 GT 5.0 speed. This is the only 5.0 that I have ever seen that is actually stock. He has never modified it at all and the car is like maybe 40000 miles, perfect running, good plugs, etc...ran a best et of 14.8@93 MPH. Could be driver..but I guess he had a harder time in his GT than his high 8 second 4 speed drag car?

You have already admitted that tracks in Ohio suck. East coast tracks are notorious for having faster times than the rest of the country.

Is Norwalk a good track....

Norwalk is a good track , but Thompson/Ohio , that track is slower .50 than Norwalk

Originally posted by CANTONRACER
Argue all you want, but the fact is the only place I ever have heard of these cars running these times is on the internet. Ostrich syndrome. "If I haven't seen it with my head in the sand; it doesn't exist."

Bob Cosby has more than solidified his reputation. He's a no B.S. racer. He lets his driving do his talking.

I knew a guy on the internet who doubted SRT-4s as much as you doubt 5.0s.......till I met him at the track and proved my car runs 13s stock.

Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't make it impossible. You admittadly go to ****ty tracks, so perhaps your view of other's reality is a bit skewed.

Anyone ever here of Norwalk? An excellent track.

If anyone knows geography, you would sorta figure out that Ohio is really not even close to being on a mountain...and from that you might get my point that....Ohio is not on a mountain. Our tracks do not go up hills. Yet these cars run these times here. In magic air they seem to.

Your ostrich syndrome might be valid to someone whom has not ever been to a track. I have made thousands upon thousands of runs, years of going 2 to 3 times a week to the dragstrip. I have no idea the number of 5.0's I have raced, so I might have some idea of what the cars happen to run. My primary street meal in my car was 5.0's when my car was running 14.0's...never got beat by a stock or mildly modified one...not even close, but they all said they ran mid 13's.

But I guess a 5.0 running mid 14's here could break into the 13's...sure, in -2000 DA...or some super stripped no option car...I give that, I know how important weather is with performance.

But back to the original thread topic...every kid thinks they have a 13 second car. Don't worry about it.

So let me ask you this: are you calling Bob Cosby a liar?

NO, BUT I AM CALLING BILL COSBY A LIAR THEM JELLO PUDDING POPS TASTE LIKE ASS:D

I believe what I have seen first hands over 13 years of drag racing.

When all the facts are given, things look differently. Just look at the stock records...then the cars...not stock at all.

If you disagree with me, fine, but leave Bob's name out of this.

Either way, this is a mute point. You'll have the group that says they did and vice versa.

But like I said...when I ran 14.0's, I cleaned house with 5.0 Mustangs that were stock or very mildly modded. Ohio does not have the worst drivers, it is not on a mountain, get the point.

Find a bone stock 5.0 5 speed today with little mileage and see what it runs....I can and have.

Originally posted by CANTONRACER
If you disagree with me, fine, but leave Bob's name out of this.


Find a bone stock 5.0 5 speed today with little mileage and see what it runs....I can and have. Why leave Bob out? He's the perfect example. Or can I only provide you examples that support your point of view? :think:

As for a low milage 5.0, mine has 25k. It's only been modified for the last 5k. I ran 14.2@98 in mine, bone stock. 13s is not out of the question, especially for an exceptional driver like Bob.

Your not getting it.

I am speaking from my experience. Your not going to ever convince me because I have seen enough 5.0's running to get a pretty good ideal of what they do.

If Bob did run that time, good for him, but for that one running that phenomal time, you have a thousand that run mid 14's and slower. But I guess since one can, they all can?

Is there not any articles that came out when these cars came out that state what they ran, like Camaro vs. 5.0?

Do you know Bob personally?

Originally posted by Big Red Jim
Ostrich syndrome. "If I haven't seen it with my head in the sand; it doesn't exist."

Bob Cosby has more than solidified his reputation. He's a no B.S. racer. He lets his driving do his talking.

I knew a guy on the internet who doubted SRT-4s as much as you doubt 5.0s.......till I met him at the track and proved my car runs 13s stock.

Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't make it impossible. You admittadly go to ****ty tracks, so perhaps your view of other's reality is a bit skewed.

Maybe neon srt-4 is fast little family car , but this one looks better than the original ... :lol:

www.mustangmods.com/data/3484/neon_srt4.jpg

Originally posted by CANTONRACER
If Bob did run that time, good for him, but for that one running that phenomal time, you have a thousand that run mid 14's and slower. But I guess since one can, they all can? I don't recall ever saying that. That's quite a leap of logic you're making. Unless of course, it's extreme sarcasm.

Originally posted by CANTONRACER
Is there not any articles that came out when these cars came out that state what they ran, like Camaro vs. 5.0? Bob gave you an example of a magazine running a 5.0 to a 13.

Originally posted by CANTONRACER
Do you know Bob personally? What does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

If Bob ran a 13 (and he did) then 5.0s are capable of it. That's all i'm saying, nothing more, nothi ng less.

Look, obviously your not getting it.

You need to get your panties out of the twist they are obviously in if someone believes something else about the 5.0 performance.

What did your typical 5.0 Mustang run? Let's not mention the autos.

Let me see these articles, not from because someone said so. Interesting when you read articles and you find out what was taken out, what was done, all on a "stock" car and you know this, so what is the problem?

I want I meant from do you know Bob personally is I do not know him so I could I assume he is a good driver, well I don't know. Could be average Joe or John Force for all I know. But I sure as hell would not be talking up someone's driving ability unless I sorta knew them. Also, you have no problem believing what he says, yet what I say which you do not agree with it seems makes what he wrote gospel to you.

Well its . Never mind I forgot what I was going to say :o :(

UNCLE! ;)

From my experience of racing, watching, and reading about 5.0's and what they ran, it is MY OPINION (based on the above) that factory-stock 5.0's were capable of 13.9's on stock rubber, stock everything, no 'free mods', etc. This applies mostly to low-option Coupes (like mine). However, the overwhelmingly-vast majority of 5.0 Mustangs were 14 second cars (be it low, mid, or high).

Bone stock 5.0 Mustangs running 13.9 are (were) about as rare as bone stock LS1 F-bodys running 12.9 (which I have not actually seen with my own beady little eyes, but have no problems believing). It did generally take a good track, decent air, and most certainly a good drive who knew what they were doing.

That said....my very first runs (14.08 best) were made at Indianapolis in July 88, and I had a long way to go before I could be considered a "good driver". Then again, I wasn't totally stock....I had a rather worseless chip and slightly larger tires.

I dont believe it. My good friend has a 92 LX 5.0 with heads, cam, headers, xpipe, 3:55 gears and a rich tune for his NOS 75 shot. I can beat him (barely, like half a car length) and all my car has is LT headers, pulley on the crank, and maybe some pcm tuning. I pull him slightly in every gear until his runs out of steam around 110mph (due to gears and crappy 5 speed). He would destroy my on the juice tho.

Originally posted by Bob Cosby
Bone stock 5.0 Mustangs running 13.9 are (were) about as rare as bone stock LS1 F-bodys running 12.9

And that can sum up this whole argument. Has a bone stock 5.0 Foxbody run a 13.9? Yes. It is normal and should you expect it out of a majority of them? Definately not. Just like 99% of LS1s are NOT 12.9 second cars bone stock. You guys are arguing over petty differences. Everyone of course is going to have a different point of view; mine, the stock/lightly modded 5.0s at my track were usually running between 14.5-15.5, you never quite know what you're going to get. Just like how I saw certain stock LT1s running low 14's and others at mid 14's. No car's time is ever set in stone.

Originally posted by Bluntdogg
It is normal and should you expect it out of a majority of them? Definately not. Sounds an awful lot like what I said...I digress.

Originally posted by hsyr
I dont believe it. My good friend has a 92 LX 5.0 with heads, cam, headers, xpipe, 3:55 gears and a rich tune for his NOS 75 shot. I can beat him (barely, like half a car length) and all my car has is LT headers, pulley on the crank, and maybe some pcm tuning. I pull him slightly in every gear until his runs out of steam around 110mph (due to gears and crappy 5 speed). He would destroy my on the juice tho.
Once again, just because your "friend" has a car that doesn't run what it should doesn't mean that other cars aren't as fast as those of us that have "been there and done that" claim to have gone.

Example...back to my 88 Coupe. Ported stock heads, ported stock intake, good cam, gears, exhaust, etc, no juice - I went 11.9's @ 111 mph on several occasions at different tracks. Does your car run 11's with those mods? Juice or not?

Not tying to pick a fight - just attempting to make a point.

To answer the origional question "Can a BONE STOCK 88 Mustang Gt run a 13.9"?


Answer "NO"


Reason: Too heavy, bad gearing, not enough hp, and not enough traction to get out of the hole at a decent rpm. I'd guess the best would be a 14.3 or so.

All this Fox body/Lx/notch body is not a GT. They were 300 lbs lighter than the GT give or take a few. Has anybody answered the question?:confused:

Originally posted by Rearpl8tsinsite
To answer the origional question "Can a BONE STOCK 88 Mustang Gt run a 13.9"?


Answer "NO"


Reason: Too heavy, bad gearing, not enough hp, and not enough traction to get out of the hole at a decent rpm. I'd guess the best would be a 14.3 or so.

All this Fox body/Lx/notch body is not a GT. They were 300 lbs lighter than the GT give or take a few. Has anybody answered the question?:confused:
Your reasons are a bit off.

The gearing between the GT and LX was the same. Also, simply looking at rear gear doesn't tell the tale. The T5 in those cars had a 3.35 1st gear and 1.99 2nd gear - helping it quite a bit.

HP was the same between the LX and GT. I believe there was enough to run 13.9 - at least in the low-option cars.

And finally, weight. There was not a 300 lb weight difference between the GT and the LX - especially between the GT and the hatchback LX. 100-150 lbs max. Those extra body pieces and slightly heavier seats just doesn't make that much difference. The biggest weight difference is between the hatch and the coupe (the extra glass adds quite a bit of weight).

That said, I don't know of any GT's that have done it. I do know of the aforementioned LX Hatch that did it back in 1988. My opinion is that it would be possible, but not very likely, and perhaps not ever done.

man theres no way a BONE STOCK gt 89 can run even close to 13s .. there weak and heavy STOCK.. but good luck trying to race one stock...

Didnt the car in question have exhaust? I gave an example of a speed density GT that ran a 14.00 on the stock 225mm rubber. This is a car I personaly worked on so I know all it had was exhaust and modded fuel pressure. I remember that the author mentioned some minor mods, so Im thinking the answer to his question is YES.

NO!

Originally posted by sukkoi19
Didnt the car in question have exhaust? I gave an example of a speed density GT that ran a 14.00 on the stock 225mm rubber. This is a car I personaly worked on so I know all it had was exhaust and modded fuel pressure. I remember that the author mentioned some minor mods, so Im thinking the answer to his question is YES.


This guy with Stang GT is my friend , he have flowmasters without tips and O/R H pipe and stock tires

meybe he runn 13 with this mods , How about this , sn95 (94-95 Mustang GT 5 speed) I have 94 , come from the fastory with 3.08s and 3.27s , so Stang with 3.27s is little bit faster than Stang with 3.08 , so there is why some Mustang is faster than other one (like 89 GT , 89 GT , 90 GT ....)

hasi....the only 94/95 5.0's that had 3.27s were automatics. The 5 speed cars had either 2.73s or 3.08s.

No worries about your english. :)

Originally posted by Bob Cosby
hasi....the only 94/95 5.0's that had 3.27s were automatics. The 5 speed cars had either 2.73s or 3.08s.

No worries about your english. :)


NOPE , Automatic's come with 2.73's , 5 speed with 3.08s and 3.27s

LOL. Whatever. Not worth an arguement.

Have a nice day. :)

Originally posted by hasi
NOPE , Automatic's come with 2.73's , 5 speed with 3.08s and 3.27s

You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

do bone stock 88 mustang gt's run 13.9


We seem to be a bit off topic. Key word GT's.

Mustang GT's are a bit different than the cars you are talking about (fox body, notch back, hatch back). I believe they are 200-300 lbs heavier than the cars talked about in this thread.

So the answer to the question is NO Stock 88 mustang GT's do not run 13's. Hatch, fox, notch are possible with a great driver. Do the math. (hp/weight) I have seen a 89 GT geared, posi, and huge tires on the back run 14.0 with a good driver at the wheel at California Speedway. Once that engine and 2 others gave in that same car needed free mods, exhaust, filter, and gt40 intake to hit 13.9's. Of coarse now that same car is close to 12.5's with heads, cam and other goodies. :eek:

Originally posted by Rearpl8tsinsite
Mustang GT's are a bit different than the cars you are talking about (fox body, notch back, hatch back). I believe they are 200-300 lbs heavier than the cars talked about in this thread.

Myth. Please scroll up to....

Originally posted by Bob Cosby
And finally, weight. There was not a 300 lb weight difference between the GT and the LX - especially between the GT and the hatchback LX. 100-150 lbs max. Those extra body pieces and slightly heavier seats just doesn't make that much difference. The biggest weight difference is between the hatch and the coupe (the extra glass adds quite a bit of weight).

Originally posted by hasi
NOPE , Automatic's come with 2.73's , 5 speed with 3.08s and 3.27s

Auto's come with 2.73's or 3.27's. 5spd's come with 2.73's or 3.08's. The reason for the 3.27 in the auto is the 2.40 1st gear and 1.47 second. If you wish to argue further I will put a $100 bet on it.

Originally posted by Rearpl8tsinsite
do bone stock 88 mustang gt's run 13.9


We seem to be a bit off topic. Key word GT's.

Mustang GT's are a bit different than the cars you are talking about (fox body, notch back, hatch back). I believe they are 200-300 lbs heavier than the cars talked about in this thread.

So the answer to the question is NO Stock 88 mustang GT's do not run 13's. Hatch, fox, notch are possible with a great driver. Do the math. (hp/weight) I have seen a 89 GT geared, posi, and huge tires on the back run 14.0 with a good driver at the wheel at California Speedway. Once that engine and 2 others gave in that same car needed free mods, exhaust, filter, and gt40 intake to hit 13.9's. Of coarse now that same car is close to 12.5's with heads, cam and other goodies. :eek:

Well the problem here is, in the title it says stock, then he goes on to say that it has exhaust work. So we really dont know whats done to it. With very minimal mods speed-density cars can hit the 13s, which is what this car seems to be. As far as bone stock, no I dont think they can touch the 13s.

Originally posted by amean94ta
NO, BUT I AM CALLING BILL COSBY A LIAR THEM JELLO PUDDING POPS TASTE LIKE ASS:D nobody found this funny?

Originally posted by amean94ta
nobody found this funny?

Why is it funny? Bob Cosby knows what he is talking about unlike a lot of retards on this board.

Originally posted by Steve Y
Why is it funny? Bob Cosby knows what he is talking about unlike a lot of retards on this board.

Yeah, keep challenging Bob when it comes to factual knowledge about the Mustang. Kinda stupid to try that guys. Bob knows his sh*t.

I have personally seen a friend of mine run his "bone stock"( all the way to stock exhaust and silencer) 91 GT, run as good as 14.1. I know this is not a usual case, but he was a hell of a driver and was at the dragstrip everyweek.

I also have seen a mustangGT run as good as 13.5 with just the addition of ET streets and 4.10's.

Jeremy

I normally don't get into this kind of thread but as much as I love the Fox body 5.0 GT mustang, I have to say I have never in my life seen a bone stock from the factory mustang run in the 13's. 14, yes, all the time. I'm not saying that it never happens but as many as I've seen run, I should have at least seen one by now run in the 13's. Still a fast car for it's time.

Originally posted by Steve Y
You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

better than you

Originally posted by hasi
better than you

Right :rolleyes:. Go away troll boy.

Im sure this was already stated, but I dont want to read through 6 pages..what is the normal times for fox bodies in the 1/4 mile?

Originally posted by Steve Y
Right :rolleyes:. Go away troll boy.

Punk

Its a tough car to get the ET with. Most are too old to get the numbers with anymore.
I have seen numerous 87-88 cars run low 14s at 97MPH in the last 14 years(308 geared sticks). The 89-92 seem to be slower due to more weight,different cam(87s were different) and MAS added. I saw Tony's black car run -I saw it go mid 13s with BS mods in Jersey as a kid. I saw Steve Collison go mid 13s with bs mods on radials. Saw Evan Smith go 13.89 at 98MPH in his car with "free" mods so low 14s in good air should not be hard to duplicate.
All of them went at least 14.0s stock.
Ed H from Canada went 13.9s stock years ago in his coupe. More I probably forgot about.

Long time readers from this board might remember back in 1998 at Cecil with 1fastFirechicken,Blackhatch,97T/A,Pee Wee from Tealnet,Wildthing94Z etc there was a kid in a 93 LX hatch with temp tags on it at Cecil County dragway. He was running 15.0s at 95 MPH. We instructed him on how to launch,overinflated his front tires and told to him to shift 5400 and to powershift. BINGO. Went 14.3 at 97MPH. Cecil is a fast track and air was good that night. But car was at stock timing,silencer in,unknown oil and NO MODS.

Blackhatch and I met another kid back in 97. Had a 88 hatchback-308s 5 speed. Kid was going mid 15s at 75/80. I did one pass-14.78 at 98MPH-it had no silencer,plug wires,burnt trac loc and a drop in filter. Blackhatch went up to Fredrick and outran about 8 5.0s all with way more mods than he. The kids could not believe it.

I can't count the number of times I have seen or helped kids knock a 1 full second of their ETs just by showing them how to launch and shift.

Basing how fast a car is by races you had on the street is laughable.

LX's are typically at best 50 pounds lighter than a GT. GTs are not as heavy as you think.

I have some mags including popular hot rodding that got a 14.2 at 97MPH with an 87 GT stock. So yes in ideal conditions 13.9 is possible. Almost impossible to duplicate these days. Fastest 5.0 foxes by far are the 93 Cobras and 87/88 GT/LXs

5400 is pretty high to be spinning a stock cammed 5.0, I actually gained 3 mph from changing my shiftpoints from 5250-5400 to 4900 and I had all the little (cheaper) bolt-ons (went from 97-98 to 100-101).

4900 is way to low with a stock cam/intake/head 5.0 especially when using the stock tach which most of the time.

Originally posted by Mike 92LX
Its a tough car to get the ET with. Most are too old to get the numbers with anymore.
I have seen numerous 87-88 cars run low 14s at 97MPH in the last 14 years(308 geared sticks). The 89-92 seem to be slower due to more weight,different cam(87s were different) and MAS added. I saw Tony's black car run -I saw it go mid 13s with BS mods in Jersey as a kid. I saw Steve Collison go mid 13s with bs mods on radials. Saw Evan Smith go 13.89 at 98MPH in his car with "free" mods so low 14s in good air should not be hard to duplicate.
All of them went at least 14.0s stock.
Ed H from Canada went 13.9s stock years ago in his coupe. More I probably forgot about.

Long time readers from this board might remember back in 1998 at Cecil with 1fastFirechicken,Blackhatch,97T/A,Pee Wee from Tealnet,Wildthing94Z etc there was a kid in a 93 LX hatch with temp tags on it at Cecil County dragway. He was running 15.0s at 95 MPH. We instructed him on how to launch,overinflated his front tires and told to him to shift 5400 and to powershift. BINGO. Went 14.3 at 97MPH. Cecil is a fast track and air was good that night. But car was at stock timing,silencer in,unknown oil and NO MODS.

Blackhatch and I met another kid back in 97. Had a 88 hatchback-308s 5 speed. Kid was going mid 15s at 75/80. I did one pass-14.78 at 98MPH-it had no silencer,plug wires,burnt trac loc and a drop in filter. Blackhatch went up to Fredrick and outran about 8 5.0s all with way more mods than he. The kids could not believe it.

I can't count the number of times I have seen or helped kids knock a 1 full second of their ETs just by showing them how to launch and shift.

Basing how fast a car is by races you had on the street is laughable.

LX's are typically at best 50 pounds lighter than a GT. GTs are not as heavy as you think.

I have some mags including popular hot rodding that got a 14.2 at 97MPH with an 87 GT stock. So yes in ideal conditions 13.9 is possible. Almost impossible to duplicate these days. Fastest 5.0 foxes by far are the 93 Cobras and 87/88 GT/LXs

Man what am I doing wrong? Running 14.0 at 101 in a nearly stock '00 GT. I should see mid 13s with these mods if those 5.0s are running that well nearly stock.

Improve on the 60ft. 101MPH means 13.6s. I have seen numerous 99 and GT sticks hit 13.8s-7s on the east coast. Fastest I ever saw was David T from LS1.com hit 13.6 in one at Capitol at 102MPH. With temp tags on it.

Originally posted by Mike 92LX
Improve on the 60ft. 101MPH means 13.6s. I have seen numerous 99 and GT sticks hit 13.8s-7s on the east coast. Fastest I ever saw was David T from LS1.com hit 13.6 in one at Capitol at 102MPH. With temp tags on it.

We'll see how much the BFG DRs help, soon. I am hoping for mid 13s out of this thing.

Originally posted by Mike 92LX
4900 is way to low with a stock cam/intake/head 5.0 especially when using the stock tach which most of the time.

have you seen a dyno graph of a stock 5.0?? it falls on its face above 5000. btw, my stock tach is within 50 - 70 rpm or so @ 6200 vs. my autometer.

heres some numbers from a stock 5.0:

RPM - HP
3000 - 144
3300 - 155
3500 - 169
3800 - 179
4000 - 185
4300 - 186
4500 - 187
4800 - 184
5000 - 181
5300 - 170
5500 - 159

These numbers are from a buddy of mines from a few years ago from a stock 5.0, which was perfectly in line with other 5.0's at the time.

I dont know how all of a sudden stock 5.0's dyno 210 nowadays though...:rolleyes:

Originally posted by MauriSSio
heres some numbers from a stock 5.0:

RPM - HP
3000 - 144
3300 - 155
3500 - 169
3800 - 179
4000 - 185
4300 - 186
4500 - 187
4800 - 184
5000 - 181
5300 - 170
5500 - 159

These numbers are from a buddy of mines from a few years ago from a stock 5.0, which was perfectly in line with other 5.0's at the time.

I dont know how all of a sudden stock 5.0's dyno 210 nowadays though...:rolleyes:

The optimum shift point would be somewhere above 5000 rpm for this motor (probably 5100-5200 rpm). That way the next gear is more in the "meat" of the powerband. How many 5.0s are stock? Most have at least a K&N, mufflers, !silencer, timing bump, etc. That would raise the shift point a couple hundred rpm higher still.

Using the HP numbers given above, and a standard 3.35 1st gear T5, I come up with 5500, 5500, and 5000 for 1/2, 2/3, and 3/4 shift points. The higher shift points on the 1/2 and 2/3 are due to the rather big rpm drop from the large gear spacing.

That said, you cannot depend on the stock tach for a reliable shift rpm. They can be WILDLY off - mine was over 1000 rpm too fast under full throttle acceleration (was fine driving around town).

BTW...those numbers are about right for a stock 5.0. With all the bolt-ons and open exhaust, my 88 made 237 RWHP (228 through the mufflers).