DFW Mustang Forums banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Hey guys,

After being a chevy guy since I started driving I am thinking of getting into the 5.0 scene. I currently own a 98 LS1 Z28 and think maybe it's time for a change.

The Z28 is fast, but thats about all I can say for it (I like the styling, ergonomics of later stangs much more).

It seems that the 5.0's are much easier to work on, with more parts out there, and less $$$ required.

My wife hates the boxy Fox bodies (and she will drive my car from time to time) so I am looking at buying a 94-95 GT.

My goal is the have a very streetable, daily driven, reliable, mid-12 second car, that looks good, and passes inspection easilly, on a budget : )

I was thinking a stroker kit with aftermarket heads, intake, and exhaust (and maybe a mild cam) could get a 94/95 GT into the twelves with an AOD tranny and mild converter.

I a m looking for a near stock sounding 5.0 that can beat mild LS1's, is that too much to ask?

Are there any web sites which really layout the detailed differences of the late model 5.0 Mustangs? I am not sure what to look for.

I am hungry for knowledge, but not sure where to get the basic information I need.

I am hoping someone can point me in the right direction. Any advice is welcome. Thanks!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
You said budget, and then stroker kit. In my opinion, the two don't go together.

I would do all of the other stuff you listed, plus 70mm throttle body, EGR spacer, and 73mm mass air, and some 3.73 or 4.10 gears. That should put you in the mid 12s easily. If you are on a budget, the FRPP Cobra intake is a pretty good buy. It's one of the cheapest intakes out there, plus the EGR spacer is built in, so you don't have to buy that. There are better intakes out there, but for 12s, it will work fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
That should be no problem.
keep the 302. There is no need for a stroker to run 12's
AFR either 165 or 185
a performer rpm intake
ed curtis custom cam
people have seen 400 to the ground with that set up at a mild 5900 rpms
It should be good for at least 350 rwhp with a smooth idle
look up FTI flowtechinduction.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
797 Posts
My wife said the same thing about the body styles. That's the main reason I chose a '94. When the wife's happy, the world is a better place. And she doesn't complain so much about the summit or jeg's boxes that keep showing up on the doorstep. :D

You're on track already. I suggest getting a copy of "Mustang Performance Handbook" 1 & 2 by Mathis. The first one is about performance, and the second one is about handling. They really complete the mustang picture.

Don't discount the handling aspect, btw, because if you can't get the power to the ground, then you'll have trouble getting your desired times. The mustang rear "quadra-bind" suspension is particularly deficient, but can be made much better with moderate effort. The sn95 (94-97) axle is wider, and the front geometry is better (more caster) than the fox, fwiw. NOTE: one of your first mods will need to be subframe connectors.

Also, pick up a copy of the Ford Motorsport (FMS) catalog. It will give you a good idea of what's available for the Mustang. Some aftermarket stuff is better than the FMS stuff, but not always. For example, the FMS aluminum driveshaft is great, but the FMS plug wires are not the best. Their heads are decent, but as mentioned already, won't match AFR or Trick Flow. Their coated shorty headers are supposedly the best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
797 Posts
Another book that might help is "How to tune & modify your Ford 5.0-Liter Mustang 1979-1995" by Steve Turner. It covers the differences among model years, and like the first Mathis book, covers the common mustang mods. There is some overlap, but it's different enought to add plenty, IMHO.

Peace,

Barry
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,214 Posts
nevabincot said:
That should be no problem.
keep the 302. There is no need for a stroker to run 12's
AFR either 165 or 185
a performer rpm intake
ed curtis custom cam
people have seen 400 to the ground with that set up at a mild 5900 rpms
It should be good for at least 350 rwhp with a smooth idle
look up FTI flowtechinduction.com
A 302 with 400 rwhp? Not without a power adder. Most people see ~300 rwhp with Ed's "combo".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
whee do you get fms catologe?
 

·
World Record Holder!
Joined
·
11,061 Posts
nevabincot said:
That should be no problem.
keep the 302. There is no need for a stroker to run 12's
AFR either 165 or 185
a performer rpm intake
ed curtis custom cam
people have seen 400 to the ground with that set up at a mild 5900 rpms
It should be good for at least 350 rwhp with a smooth idle
look up FTI flowtechinduction.com
Not 350rwhp and certainly not 400rwhp on a N/A 302. I've got ported TFS heads, ported intake, custom turbo cam and low compression. My car made 306rwhp naturally aspirated. I also had a 70mm throttle body, shortie 1 5/8" headers, 255 in tank fuel pump, 24lb injectors, C&L 76mm MAF and a fuel pressure regulator and the stock 3.08 gears. On BF Goodrich Comp T/A street tires it ran 13.40s at close to 108mph with crappy 60 foot times, granny shifting and a lot of wheel spin in 2nd gear.

IF I had wanted to stay naturally aspirated, I would have milled the heads (they haave 65.5 cc chambers), run long tube headers and a more N/A friendly cam and probably could have put down 325-330rwhp but that's about it. If you want it to pass emissions, it ain't going to get much better than that. With 3.73 gears and some slicks, it would have run deep into the 12s.

I wouldn't do a stroker if you are on a budget. I raced several LS1s on the highway with my 306rwhp and beat them handily. My car only weight 3040 without me in it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
Most of the combos are at least above 300rwhp with a smooth idle and peaking around 5400 with 9:1
peaking at 5900-6000 at 11:1 350 rwhp has been done many times and closer to 400rwhp on some.
call ed curtis, buddy rawls or brian tooley
tell em you want 400 to the ground on a 302 with pump gas that will idle and I doubt they will laugh at you.
All they need is a credit card number.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,214 Posts
Not to bust your balls or anything, but I think Ed would list the 400 hp combo on his site if it only happened once. Even if the the $$ was outrageous, it would be too much of an accomplishment not to list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
well i dont have the set up so i really cant argue.
but I'll see if i can find some set ups/ dyno sheets

Its just crazy to think someone couldnt come up with a 400 hp 302/306

buddy rawls has one on the total engine airflow page pushing
over 600 horsepower and built to last. with all off the shelf parts from TEA,www. totalengineairflow.com

I'll shoot buddy an email and see what he says.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
797 Posts
1.3 HP/Cu.In. for a daily driven, naturally aspirated, emissions legal, pushrod engine would be quite an accomplishment. Drop one or more of those constraints and it is still admirable, but much more feasable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
ive got a 95gt. i can tell you from personal experience that they are not quite as easy to make fast as a fox body. and the tuning is not as easy as well. the factory computer is considered to be the absolute worst. i had to have a chip burned, and convert to 93 and lower iac,tps, and t/body before mine would idle correctly.you can look at my car. it is listed in the december car of the month. i kinda went all out on mine. i make 361 to the wheels with a 331. i can tell you that 400 to the wheels on a hydraulic cam is extremely diffucult, esp. with a 94/95 car and a 306, and making it driveable. mine is very very driveable, if you dont mind the poor fuel mileage. i am a former ford dealership technician, and i built my car myself, all except the paint. any questions you may have, im happy to assist.

david.
 
G

·
Tuning a 94/95 GT to idle properly is NOT difficult. I got mine to idle like a champ with a fugged up E-cam, so it's not that difficult. Oh, and I didn't use a chip either. However, I will agree that the cars are difficult to make fast... unless you go all out ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,214 Posts
nevabincot said:
here is a link of a 400rwhp 306 but its spinning 6500 instead of 6000 http://www.the-arnolds.net/Cobra/
Looks like he made ~350 rwhp @ 5800 on the 10.5:1 306 that was setup to be emmisions legal but it was never tested to see if it would actually pass. The car had the A/C and power steering removed and had U/D pullies on the other accessories. Among other things it was also running stage III ported TWs, long tubes, catted 3" exhaust and PMS.

I doubt that adding the PS and a free wheeling A/C compressor would rob 50 hp, but it would rob some. That would be a sweet setup but shit what do stage III TWs cost?

The 400 rwhp car was not emmissions legal.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,928 Posts
you can still have a 12 sec car, and have emissions, mine has an off road pipe, but other then that, its all still there, and I am stil running the stock e7's. Get a set of legal aluminum heads, and a emisions legal cam, and you should be fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top