87 Stang GT vs 89 Formula WS6

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Dec 18, 2003 | 10:27 AM

#31

Pro

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally posted by 90formula5spd
no i have not driven a TBI truck but i have driven a ****ty little 4cylinder ranger, that thing has no ***** either but it doesn't need it, it had the low end TQ it needs, im sure chevy did not make a truck that never ran well, just wouldn't be very logical, and it if didn't run well b4 why did you buy it? lol, im not trying to be a jacka-s-s here but it was just an opinion, i understand if u have the money and just feel like it but if i were you pro, i would just put that money into my 91, but hell thats me and you kno what you want i dont, have fun guyz
chris

My first car was a 90 model Tor-***. What a POS.
It was time for a new car in late 1998, and I was like F this Im getting a truck. So I picked up my 95 (I didnt have a clue the difference between the years - I was lucky enough to get the newer interior style... but was one year ahead of the Vortecs).

I still like my truck. I drive it more than the camaro, and actually it is worth about twice as much (maybe a little less that that). But since Im a college student, moving from place to place is a common occurance.

But most of my money goes towards vehicle maintenance (or future projects for it). So I can afford the truck and car together, so I have no need to sell one or the other in order to get by. So its just a project truck. Just like the Z.

Dec 18, 2003 | 11:11 AM

#32

nexus6

Registered User

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 131

From: Dallas AKA Hell

if i ever went to look at a formula and saw tbi on it,ide shut the hood and walk away...................

Dec 18, 2003 | 01:35 PM

#33

90formula5spd

Registered User

Joined: Nov 2003

Posts: 97

From: Minnesota

lol, you have no imagination, **** i wouldn't want any 305 period! **** those bitch *** expensive to make fast engines, **** i'd rather have an import. If it aint a 350+ **** it, unless of course it is the almighty ford 302, or some sort of german or italian engine... yes of course you can make them fast, you can make nething fast but hell why not make it a 350?!!?

Dec 19, 2003 | 02:00 AM

#34

scott9050

Registered User

Joined: Jan 1999

Posts: 1,547

From: Panhandle of West Virginia

Quote:

Originally posted by rudy
but to be realllllllly honest, its hard to beat the 5.0 for bang-for-the-buck. And the 5 speed cars are fun to drive. They are more poorly built than the f bodies though. Expect a lot of creaks and rattles. Check out the mustang section in summit. Lots of cheap goodies.

They are not "poorly built" any more than the 3rd gens. I have had 2 3rd gens and 2 fox bodies, the fox's have held up quite well. Neither are no where near as refined as todays cars but no one expects them to be.

Dec 19, 2003 | 02:05 AM

#35

scott9050

Registered User

Joined: Jan 1999

Posts: 1,547

From: Panhandle of West Virginia

Quote:

Originally posted by 79TTCAMARO
If it was a 5speed firebird, I would say go with that. Everyone hates TBI here, but I like it alot. VERY reliable. Maybe my car is a freak, but with very few mods its a 91 camaro rs that runs low 14's...I beat my freinds 91 stang till the top of 3rd and he runs low 13s. My other friend who runs high 13s and I beat him till 110. Their cars are constantly breaking down...mine hasnt once with 130k...(knock on wood). Mustangs are (quick) to a point, then you have to put a blower on them to make them go (fast).

The 5.0 engine is one of the most reliable out there and they have long lives due to the high nickel content in the casting. If they are breaking down regularly then it's due to their lack of maintainence. The top end of the 5spd cars with 2.73 gears is in the neighborhood of 148, right about the same as the 350 TPI cars, and they respond better to mods. The EEC-IV computer in the Mustang is simply heads and shoulders above what GM offered as far as modibility during the same time. A mass air conversion using used parts for the Mustang is cheap as well.

Last edited by scott9050; Dec 19, 2003 at 02:14 AM.

Dec 19, 2003 | 02:06 AM

#36

scott9050

Registered User

Joined: Jan 1999

Posts: 1,547

From: Panhandle of West Virginia

Quote:

Originally posted by Zach86Z28
Well I'm pretty sure the Stang is gone, but I do have an opportunity to pick up an 87 Chrysler Conquest TSI with only 75k on it for a very good price, so I think the Firebird may have to wait. We'll see what happens though.

I would pick the Formula over the Conquest. Their reputation for reliability is not very good, and their mod potential is way below the Formula.

Dec 19, 2003 | 02:09 AM

#37

scott9050

Registered User

Joined: Jan 1999

Posts: 1,547

From: Panhandle of West Virginia

Quote:

Originally posted by 91 Redd Sledd
I own one of both camps cars.If I had to choose between the two,it would be the Mustang all the way.Parts are cheap they are quick and a real Hoot to drive.I have owned 2 Birds,2 Camaros,and now 3 Mustangs.I really like my 91 Mustang.It is a stock 302 with a E cam,Shorty Headers,X pipe (no cat) and 2 chamber flows,3:55 gear,5 speed car.And runs 13.50's Those are the only mods.And don't belive that crap about getting to a certain point on a 5.0 and having to put a blower on it.It is a engine just like a 350 (just short a few cubes)Ford heads suck.It's all in the heads.There are quite a few N/A mustangs out there running quicker times than mine by far. Are far as the Conquest goes me personally I would stay away.Thats just me though.

James

Not only are the stock E7TE heads crappy (F-150 heads) but the intake sucks as well. The MAF is also restrictive. There are plenty of N/A stock compression Mustangs hitting 11's with the right parts.

Dec 19, 2003 | 02:11 AM

#38

scott9050

Registered User

Joined: Jan 1999

Posts: 1,547

From: Panhandle of West Virginia

Quote:

Originally posted by 91 Redd Sledd
Whoops one thing I forgot. That 87 you were looking at, I would stay away from it.The 87's were a speed density system.I would hold out for a nice 90-92.Usually everyone(If the plan on doing mods) change there speed density system over to a Mass air system.Ford Racing sells a kit to do it with a new PCM and everything but I think it is like $400-$600 to get the kit.
Also If you planned on spraying it at all,stayaway from the 93's thats the year they went from forged pistons back to Hyperutectics.

James

You can get the kit used for the conversion from MPS for around $200. The speed density cars are a bit faster stock as well, partly due to the speed density system, partly from the cars having less standard features than later models.

Dec 19, 2003 | 06:58 AM

#39

91 Redd Sledd

Registered User

Joined: May 2002

Posts: 824

From: St.Johns MI

im sure chevy did not make a truck that never ran well

My Uncle had a 1980 Chevy 1/2 ton with a 305.That was a Big POS.And it was'nt from lack of maintenance.It was just a plain POS.I have nothing against the 305 at all.I actually am one of the people that think it is a good engine but the one in that truck was'nt.

James

Dec 20, 2003 | 07:57 AM

#40

Zepher

Registered User

Joined: Jul 2000

Posts: 1,880

From: Norfolk, VA. USA

If you can wait, find a Formula 350 or a Formula 305TPI 5 speed, 90-92 being the preferred years for the 305 model, 230hp and 300TQ. Any year of the 350 is fine.

Dec 20, 2003 | 09:19 AM

#41

Pro

Guest

Posts: n/a

I thought Speed Density is what everyone wanted to convert to.
Isnt that what the LT1 is not? Chevy needed to make up its mind.

Dec 20, 2003 | 09:32 AM

#42

Zepher

Registered User

Joined: Jul 2000

Posts: 1,880

From: Norfolk, VA. USA

Quote:

Originally posted by Pro
I thought Speed Density is what everyone wanted to convert to.
Isnt that what the LT1 is not? Chevy needed to make up its mind.

The LT1 is SD in 92 and 93.
SD is better for an N/A car for max power, but requires programming for mods.
MAF is better for mods with no tuning (tuning will give you more power, but the MAF system compensates better than MAP)