© Copyright 1995 thru 2008 - The Mustang Works™. All Rights Reserved.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
08-05-2001, 11:13 PM | #1 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bossier City, La
Posts: 6
|
Horespower and Tourqe?
I just traded my 96 GT in for a 95 GT. convertable! With only 58000 miles on it! First off i want to say that, the 5.0 is a hell of a lot better! 4.6 can't compare with a 5.0! I just wanted to know if anyone knows the horsepower and torque rating on this motor for this year? It's a 5 speed, i think it has 2.73 gears, barked the tires in 3rd today! Thanks!
|
08-05-2001, 11:16 PM | #2 |
RICE taste like Chicken
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 687
|
I like the 5.0 better personally, but the 4.6 is way ahead in the tech department. Especially the 99+.
Your car is 215 hp, 285 tq. Barked the tires in 3rd with 2.73's??? really? hmm. cool. ------------------ Dustin 89 Saleen GT Sport,428 rwhp,TFS Street Heat Intake,TFS TW Heads,TFS #2 cam,BD-11A 9 psi,Crane 1.6 rr's,BBK 70mm TB,Pro-M 80mm MAF,MSD 6BTM, FMS 9mm wires,BBK longtubes,BBK Short H-pipe,American Thunder cat back,3.55's 12.3@119 |
08-06-2001, 09:21 AM | #3 |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Kamloops, BC
Posts: 2,875
|
I like your handle
The 5.0 is a good engine. Is your 5.0 Stock? Barking the tires in 3rd gear with 2.73's is not an easy task. You could have steaper gears or a little more steam under the hood... ------------------ 1995 Mustang GT |
08-06-2001, 11:31 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: San Angelo, TX
Posts: 377
|
|
08-06-2001, 11:11 PM | #5 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bossier City, La
Posts: 6
|
it's stock, haven't done anything to the motor, it's been lowered with BBK springs and that's about it. I had to power shift to get it to bark the tires in 3rd, the tires are new too! I'm gonna put a 3.55 in it soon!
|
08-06-2001, 11:44 PM | #6 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
------------------ Rick My 89lx(updated 7/20/2001) Sold |
|
08-07-2001, 10:44 AM | #7 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Tallahassee,Florida,USA
Posts: 188
|
The thing with the K&N is that you only feel horsepower if you know its there cus it really don't do anything on a stock motor...its just a reason to put stickers on stuff
|
08-07-2001, 11:14 AM | #8 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Kamloops, BC
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
I though my car was stock, until I crawled under the car and saw the Dynomax Cat back, went to change the air filter, only to pull out a K&N. You just never know... ------------------ 1995 Mustang GT |
|
08-07-2001, 12:58 PM | #9 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 10
|
yea 5.0 's kick butt
I too have a 95 MUST GT ,though mines a coupe. I test drove a 96 4.6 and your're right it doesn't compare. had I drove the 4.6 first I probably wouldn't have bought a mustang if i didn't drive the 5.0. ------------------ 95 GT 5.0 stillen exh. K&N ALL PAID FOR !!!!!! |
08-07-2001, 10:22 PM | #10 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
08-07-2001, 11:01 PM | #11 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bossier City, La
Posts: 6
|
Crawled up under the car today! Still has stock exhaust on it, checked air filter, just a regular paper filter. Pretty sure it has 2.73 gears on it. Bumped up the timing to 13 degrees today! defenitely feeling a big difference on throttle response! This 5.0 defenitely beats that modular 4.6 motor! This car is a keeper not to mention it's a convertable!!
|
08-08-2001, 01:38 AM | #12 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: coweta OK USA
Posts: 93
|
thats strange, when my cars was stock at 50,000 miles and my brothers 96 stock gt with 98,000 miles on it, he bet me all of the time , they were both automatics.
|
08-08-2001, 08:37 AM | #13 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Kamloops, BC
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
------------------ 1995 Mustang GT |
|
08-08-2001, 02:14 PM | #14 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Jose, California USA
Posts: 275
|
When I bought my car, I didn't know it had a full exhaust untill I looked under the car.
As for your car, it might have 3.08's. ------------------ 1993 Mustang GT - March Ram Air & Pullies, K&N, C&L 73mm MAF, 3.73 Gears, Super Competition Hooker Headers, 2 1/2 in. High Flow H-Pipe & Cat Back, Pro 5.0 Shifter, 16* Timing Advance, 8.5mm MSD Super Cunductor Plug Wires, Romoved front Sway Bar, Pro-Shift Lite, LX lights |
08-08-2001, 08:47 PM | #15 |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 5,246
|
Actually, if you want to get technical Ford rated the 5.0 manual at 225hp and 300lb/ft and the auto at 215, 285.
|
08-08-2001, 11:23 PM | #16 |
RICE taste like Chicken
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 687
|
Unit-
Where do you get your sources?? I have never seen a 94-95 Mustang rated above 215 auto or not. Just curious ------------------ Dustin 89 Saleen GT Sport,428 rwhp,TFS Street Heat Intake,TFS TW Heads,TFS #2 cam,BD-11A 9 psi,Crane 1.6 rr's,BBK 70mm TB,Pro-M 80mm MAF,MSD 6BTM, FMS 9mm wires,BBK longtubes,BBK Short H-pipe,American Thunder cat back,3.55's 12.3@119 |
08-08-2001, 11:44 PM | #17 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: coweta OK USA
Posts: 93
|
my 95 gt is rated at 215 hp, and my brothers 96 is rated at 225hp with 3.08 gears i had 2:73. and when raced we left it in drive and he beat me every time
|
08-08-2001, 11:47 PM | #18 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bossier City, La
Posts: 6
|
when i had my 96 GT it was rated at 215, and it was a 5 speed and had 3.27 gears. I couldn't beat a single 5.0 out there, stock or not!
|
08-08-2001, 11:50 PM | #19 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bossier City, La
Posts: 6
|
The fastest i ever got my 96 GT at the track was a 15.20 @ 90 MPH. I can tell just by driving my 95 now that it is faster, than the 96 GT's
|
08-09-2001, 12:06 AM | #20 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: coweta OK USA
Posts: 93
|
WAS YOUR 96 A AUTO
|
|
|