can't we all just get along?

 

First I have read magazine tests of both cars from those years.The mustang was quicker every time. The 305's were'nt close but the 350's were within a tenth.And second when I had a '82 GT I beat a friends '82 Z fairly easy,when I had a '86 GT I beat a kid in towns '86 GTA bad. And when I bought an '89 Steeda (stock engine) I nudged out my friends '89 GTA with a 350 by a car lenth.
And how old are you? If you had you liscence in the late 80's you would know that on the streets the 5.0 was dominant like the LS1 is today(Sure the GN was faster but you saw 15 5.0's for every GN on the road).Thats what started the aftermarket to make speed parts for fuel injected cars.

 

A few things about your experiences, the 82 305 was an LG4 block , even if it had the cross fire injection, we're talkign 170 or so hp AT THE CRANK.

They never made an 86 GTA, the first year of the GTAs was 1987 the base 305 in it was rated at 190 hp and came with an auto, the 5 speed 305 had 15 more hp.

 

Thats nice to know, could you post some links, Thanks

Ouch, your credibility kinda went out the window there, Anyways, your personal experiences do not mean squat to me, if they did however, i could tell you mine. Though i am only 21, my father had an 87 IROC-Z, brand new and i remember riding with him in the car from the time he got it, until the time he sold it (93), and never remember him having any trouble with the 5.0 crowd. However my personal experience, and yours do not mean squat, please post some links, thanks.

I am 21, because i was not driving in the late 80's, i guess that means i do not know what i am talking about, ok, thats fine. I guess that also means since i wasn't driving in the late 80's, i didnt have an 87 Formula 350, and never raced a 5.0 either. Thats fine, i wont even tell you what happened when i raced 5.0's because once again personal experiences on the street dont mean squat. Please post some links, Thanks.

 

http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html

All kinds of 1/4 mile times at that site. I gathered a couple just to make a comparison... and yeah, I realize that people went quicker here and there but we could debate altitude and track conditions all day long and never get anywhere...

And here's another one... same track
Mustang vs Camaro

87' Iroc Z
14.9 & 15.3

87' Mustang GT
15.3

90' Mustang LX (lighter and quicker)
14.9

You can go through there and compare times for yourself. One thing that did hold the later L98 cars back was the lack of a manual-trans option. Either way, with the times as close as they were... a race between the two stock-for-stock is a DRIVERS race. IMO, not much to argue about.

-Mindgame

 

I agree completely. I was just trying to prove a point that the 5.0's did not dominate the streets, a good driver in an IROC or Formula was no walk in the park for a good driver in a 5.0 similarly equipped.

 

And I think that list of times validates your point very well.

With times within a few tenths here and there on various year models... it's just going to come down to driver skill. No "dominance" to it.

-Mindgame

 

Exactly.

 

It was my experience that stock to stock the 5.0s and Iroc z tpi with 3.23s from the factory were pretty well neck and neck. The aftermarket was much much greater for the 5.0s and it responded better to known mods. Later now the TPI has alot of stuff that can be done to it to make it scream like a stripped A$$ed ape.

 

While this is your personal experience(s), please don't take offense but being that you were about 4yrs old when the car was purchased and 8 or 9 when it was sold, I highly doubt you were extremely aware of what he beat and didn't beat.

 

But me, the person he quoted turned 18 in 1985 , I have owned an 82 myself, and I wouldnt brag about beating it. I have also had a few 87 to 90 GTAs and my cousin that I am raising is driving around an 86 T/A TPI.

 

If you guys were driving back then you would realize that 350 ones were few and far between.The vast majority were the 305/auto's which were'nt fast at all.I guess thats what gives the 3rd gens a bad rep.
Your right when you say they did'nt respond that well to the basic mods but now the aftermarket has a lot of cool parts to make them fast now.In fact my GF wants to get a project car I told her that a 3rd gen would be a good car to get.
As for the GT running 15.3.Unless it was a bad driver it was probaly a auto which were proven to be a half second slower than the 5 speed.So that would make a GT 5 speed in the 14.8 range and that means an LX notch 5 speed should run in the 14.6 range.And I've seen them do it.
As for the '86 GTA I mentioned, I guess it was a T/A.It was back in '90 so I guess he added the GTA rims and other stuff. I did'nt pay to much attention.I thought it looked cool but was'nt very fast and I beat it easily.
As for road test link. I dont know anyonline ones and my old mags are put away in boxes in the basement.I have 10 big boxes of car mag's from mid 80's to present.However I went throgh some mags that I did'nt put away and I found this intersting quote from a GM High tech Performance mag from MAY 2000 page#64 titled "Born To be Mild" written by Johnny Hunkins who is now the editor for Popular HOT Rodding mag.
This is the first paragraph of the article

" In a day when 340-hp factory GM hotrods are the norm, it would seem hard to have much appreciation for the performance of TPI-powered camaros and firebirds built between 1985 and 1992.Even for their day, they were only so-so performers.They regularly got tromped by the 5-liter mustangs,six cylinder Buicks and even four-cylinder Mopars-cars that frequently cost far less than the F-body.The 5-liter Mustang,in fact, owes its legacy almost entirely to the F-bodys relative sloth.Nevertheless,third gens have 3 saving graces:their relatively high level of personal comfort,their good build quality (when compared with mustang), and their attractive styling-all which have kept them in reasonablefavor to this day,performance notwithstanding."
And this is a word for word quote from a GM magizine
So if any of you have back issues of that mag GMHTP May 2000 page 64 paragraph 1. Written by John Huntkins.
There is another post on here called 5.0 stang were the guy said that a '88 mustang with no mods beats his friends '92z.
A good friend of mine had a '87 IROC 305/auto that seemed to be in good running condition that had shiftkit,cat back exhaust,ported upper intake, and a air foil that ran a best of 15.7@87.
__________________
'88 Saleen- 310 cid, Novi 2000, twisted wedge,C4
best et- 9.68
best mph- 146.18
'00 T/A- Hurst,MTI lid,Borla catback,Eradispeed rotors,Hotchkis LCA's,KB DD SFC's, spec st.3 clutch,SLP linelock,Nitto DR's
my site- www.renegadesaleen.com

 

None taken at all. 5 when he got it, 10 when he sold it, doubt all you want, please dont take offense to me telling you that i am quite aware of what he beat and didnt. However you make a good point, my personal experiences do not mean anything. Mindgame posted some hard numbers, putting away the theory of the "5.0 dominance".

 

I was'nt bragging about beating a '82. He asked me to prove how mustangs of same year were faster. I meant as to 2 equal drivers line up in stock '82's and the '82 mustang won. Amongst the articles I read in the day.
Sounds like you had a lot of nice cars.
I've owned 9 different mustangs but I was looking for a car within a few years old I was'nt imppresed with the newer mustangs looks or performance.So I bought a '97 WS6 T/A which I liked but traded it in for a 2000 T/A a year later.Better looks and the LS1

 

In the late 80's, early 90's, the car to get for a "fast" ride on a budget was the 5.0 LX. Yes, you could get a 350 Camaro if you were lucky. The VAST majority of the V8 Fbodies, however, were the 305's, and they got smoked by the 5.0 LX.