"Estimated" horsepower numbers are ****ing lame. Put it on a dyno, drag race it and get some numbers, or shut up.

 

Exactly! 350 ft/lbs. is very hard for a 305 to make. Stock L98 350s put out 345 ft/lbs. and they are one of the torquiest 350 engines GM ever put out.

 

Big Red Jim.. car is off the road for summer. I am looking around the area for a dyno, so hopefully this summer it will be dynoed. But the estimates I used are VERY accurate. (Not to mention a few diff. methods were used) BTW.. I am not the one bragging about my numbers; steve said they are BS.
Wow.. steve comes thru w/ his absolute brilliance YET AGAIN. A L98 with 345 ft/lbs? hahahahahahaha.. nice one. What next.. your mustang has 300 horse power? I have YET to see a L98 put out more than 315 lb's numbnutz. Yes.. the L98's are EXTREMELY torquey.. but 345? That is just funny..

 

That's what they were rated at, so yes.

 

Nope.. not at all. They were rated right about 312-315 lbs. SOME might be lucky enough to hit 320-325.. but 345 on a stock L98 is totally out of the question.

 

Looks like others here have the same opinion about you as me.
Enough said !

 

The 1987 L98's were rated 315 tq (the Firebirds anyway). By 1992, however, (not sure what year exactly), they were indeed rated 345tq. So unless you're talking about rwtq, then you are mistaken. They did indeed make 345tq.

 

Jesus, what are you, 18? Learn to just give up when you're wrong.

Taken from thirdgen.org, the definitive source for third generation F-bodies.

 

Well im glad the whole e-mail notification things works.

God you guys are a bunch of babies.

As far as heads, cam and what not i have no clue. Its being dynoed in two weeks.

 

wow, maybe you should listen to big red jim when he posts. he knows his stuff pretty well. nice kill though MikeRock, always good to hear a bout a bike going down to a car.

 

Yeah even if it was a 250 it still felt good.

 

Very hard for a 305 to make a lot of power/torque? Hm.. some of the newer (early 90's) 305 specs will whoop your mustangs ***.. your MODDED mustang of course.

And BTW.. those hi power L98's arent that common. Most were around 320 or so.

EDIT: Yes, i was wrong about a L98 having 345 torque; that is focking CRAZY!!!!

Double EDIT: That is kool you killed a bike. That is prolly one of the kooler things to do with a bike. Did you guys ever see that Trans Am vs GSXR 1000 video? Crazy stuff..

 

I believe you are talking about Seve's 2000 GT correct?

If so, there is NO 305 powered car from the factory that will beat a 2000 GT mustang. The best I've ever seen for a factory 305 is 14.8, and that was a 1LE car. Most are slower than that.

Most newer GT's are easily low 14 second cars (I've seen a couple high 13's also).

Once again, this is assuming you are talking about stock for stock.

 

estimating track times is almost as fun as estimating power output!

 

Red Screamin; an LB9 305 (230 hp, 300 lb/s) would have NO problem going prolly closer to a 14 flat.. but I am not sure. But deff. better than a 14.8.
And yes, i am regarding steves 2000 stang. seeing as though a 2005 MUSTANG has 300 hp, and 315 lbs of torque, that would not be a problem AT ALL for a LB9 305 to eat up.. a 1992 LB9 of course..