2000 v6 auto vs. 1987 5.0 auto

Unit 5302 · 03-22-2001, 12:47 AM

As I recall, MM&FF got a 99 V-6 to run a 14.97, stock, with the spare removed, and some whoop *** driving. They said it was easier to the the V-6 into the 14's than the last 4.6L SOHC GT.

The little V-6's can appearently be quite quick, but add an auto to the mix and the 14.97 quickly turns into mid 15's. The catback may give a few hp, benefit (10hp), but that's it.

I'd be very suprised if the V-6 auto runs better than a 15.4 with those mods.

My uncle just G-teched his bone stock 89 GT convert with the AOD. With bad wheelspin, 0-60 7.1sec, 1/4mile 15.80@93mph. We all know the G-techs trap high, and the wheelspin hurt him, he got a 6.7 later, no 1/4 time, but their ET's are really quite accurate.

My uncles car has a little over 50k on it. Probably could use a tune, and he cut 4/10 in his next 0-60 which probably would have put him in the low 15's, but still, a 15.80 was the first run.

I'm really disappointed in the times it ran, but can't dispute them. A solid running V-6 would have taken it.

As far as all this ricer CAI (I hate that abbreviation looks like a wacked ricer ignition company) bullfluff talk, shove it, cause most 5.0's will hand you your *** even with all those mods. I'm sure my 87 would be showing you taillights with those mods and a 75 shot. All my 87 has is exhaust and cold air. Judging by the competition I've beaten with it, it's a real high 13 real low 14 car.

Did you win, maybe. Do you have some kind of bragging rights over 5.0's. Hell no.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which is your favorite general auto parts store?	Fox Body	Blue Oval Lounge	28	12-07-2017 11:18 AM
Auto Tranny in 2000 V6	Bake	Small Ponies	2	07-30-2002 01:53 PM
0 - 60 Times on auto 2000 GT	Toppchef	Modular Madness	2	07-19-2002 04:10 PM
I Lost my first race in my 2000 GT	Mercury	Stang Stories	10	05-27-2001 10:39 PM
Safety Recall for 1999 Cobra and 2000 Cobra R	JoeJ	Special Production	0	04-13-2001 08:18 PM

03-22-2001, 12:47 AM	#11
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	As I recall, MM&FF got a 99 V-6 to run a 14.97, stock, with the spare removed, and some whoop * driving. They said it was easier to the the V-6 into the 14's than the last 4.6L SOHC GT. The little V-6's can appearently be quite quick, but add an auto to the mix and the 14.97 quickly turns into mid 15's. The catback may give a few hp, benefit (10hp), but that's it. I'd be very suprised if the V-6 auto runs better than a 15.4 with those mods. My uncle just G-teched his bone stock 89 GT convert with the AOD. With bad wheelspin, 0-60 7.1sec, 1/4mile 15.80@93mph. We all know the G-techs trap high, and the wheelspin hurt him, he got a 6.7 later, no 1/4 time, but their ET's are really quite accurate. My uncles car has a little over 50k on it. Probably could use a tune, and he cut 4/10 in his next 0-60 which probably would have put him in the low 15's, but still, a 15.80 was the first run. I'm really disappointed in the times it ran, but can't dispute them. A solid running V-6 would have taken it. As far as all this ricer CAI (I hate that abbreviation looks like a wacked ricer ignition company) bullfluff talk, shove it, cause most 5.0's will hand you your * even with all those mods. I'm sure my 87 would be showing you taillights with those mods and a 75 shot. All my 87 has is exhaust and cold air. Judging by the competition I've beaten with it, it's a real high 13 real low 14 car. Did you win, maybe. Do you have some kind of bragging rights over 5.0's. Hell no.