1985 GT - Test your mustang knowledge, guess how fast i'll run 1/4 mile

[HoodStrype]

Originally Posted by Unit 5302

Dude... you're way off base here, and you're digging yourself a hole. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but you don't have much of a chance of legitimately debating this.

GT-40P heads are VERY good heads if you're not trying to get your weekend warrior above 110mph or run mid 12's in the quarter. They respond very well to a port job, and the flow more than enough to be matched up to a nice low lift aftermarket cam. As everybody has pointed out, the F-303 cam (which is the best of the alphabet cams in general) probably has too much lift for the GT-40P heads to truly use at maximum efficiency (GT40-P heads actually drop a little flow between .500 and .550 lift from the factory), but that doesn't negate the fact they are far better than stock.

I don't know what you have/haven't seen, and I don't care. There are people on this site that have put E7 headed cars into the 12's without any forced induction or nitrous. There are witnesses to stock fox bodies running high 13's right off the factory floor with bumped timing (not that more than a very few can duplicate that)

Good driving can mean more than a lot of boltons, but eventually, even an average driver with enough go-fast parts will be faster than a great driver with no go fast goodies.

Posts don't mean much to me these days, but I have been a member of this site since 1999, which is a lot longer than most here can say. Even though I don't know as much about the latest Mustang parts available or even necessarily as much as I did when I was an active member, I do still have more than enough knowledge to spot the correct assumptions in this debate.

I like how you start your "can we just move on" thread with a few jabs... yeah, that always works, lol.

Oh, and btw, Jeff Chambers was running 10's on a N/A unported GT-40P headed car, if I remember right.

Quote: "The more you stir it, the more it stinks"

Dude quit trying to start crap. Let's relax.

[Unit 5302]

I'm more than relaxed. If you think that was me trying to start crap, then you really don't know me very well, which is surprising considering how long we've been registered here.

If I meant to insult you, you'd know it.

[HoodStrype]

Originally Posted by Unit 5302

If I meant to insult you, you'd know it.

I'd know it... hahaha lmao! C'mon...


guys you spend to much time and too much writing to try to get to me. It's all opinion, and jeez it's the internet... don't get mistaken for e-thugz!!! Chill out! Life's short

[84LX89GT]

The clutch is in, I got a short throw shifter installed, drive shaft loop is in, new front brake lines are in, and my new rear control arms just showed up (in time). I just gotta bleed the brakes and road test this thing then i'll tear it apart again
I got granatelli upper/lower control arms, 4 cyl. springs. to go in rear and some minor engine tuning (gonna change MSD distributor advance curve/total advance).

The end is drawing near

I'm gonna update my profile to include my '85 GT so if anyone wants to browse that, go ahead

[tireburner163]

You want to keep the V-8 rear springs.


The 4 banger rear springs are too soft, the suspension ends up having too much travel. It absorbs all your launch energy instead of planting the tires.

[bigred90gt]

Originally Posted by tireburner163

You want to keep the V-8 rear springs.


The 4 banger rear springs are too soft, the suspension ends up having too much travel. It absorbs all your launch energy instead of planting the tires.

I have heard the opposite. The 4 cyl rear springs help the ass end squat, allowing for greater weight distribution to the rear of the car, giving better traction and a harder launch. I'm no expert, but this is common practice.

[Unit 5302]

If your springs allow for "too much" squat, you waste energy lifting wheels off the ground rather than applying it to forward acceleration.

[RBatson]

Originally Posted by bigred90gt

I have heard the opposite. The 4 cyl rear springs help the ass end squat, allowing for greater weight distribution to the rear of the car, giving better traction and a harder launch. I'm no expert, but this is common practice.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read it.