Well, i have to disagree GraveDigger. Your car wasted mine when i went driving with you one time. I could not even keep up. I think my car wins the slowest car title. Plus, it only has 3 gears, and goes 0-60 in about 20-25 seconds.
That makes my truck a little faster.

HoboKamera wrote:
Well, i have to disagree GraveDigger. Your car wasted mine when i went driving with you one time. I could not even keep up. I think my car wins the slowest car title. Plus, it only has 3 gears, and goes 0-60 in about 20-25 seconds.

ill vouch for that...

GraveDigger wrote:
Slow car eh? Since I am king of the slow cars, I propose a race.

Well, i have to disagree GraveDigger. Your car wasted mine when i went driving with you one time. I could not even keep up. I think my car wins the slowest car title. Plus, it only has 3 gears, and goes 0-60 in about 20-25 seconds.

blackcougar wrote:
ive thought of a few things that ive wanted to do to it for power but the thing i was going to do would have made it as about as reliable as a dsm

dont do that, you will be shot.........................by me

92TSIpos wrote:
you would think that a "high output" v8 would produce more than 200 hp. 1st gen DSMs have 190 hp stock and 2nd gen DSMs have 210hp stock, and thats half the cylinders.

well considering the 5.0L (non-HO) put out about 140hp... (looking at the 1980 motor, one I had in a car I was messing with)

Out of the box the late model 5.0L HO deffinetly isn't impressive, but I think their quick boost in HP with aftermarket parts is what gave them their reputation.
(I haven't followed that motor much, so I'm not sure how the earlier 5.0L compares in power)

for shits and giggles:
94 Mustang GT 5speed. (one of the MPLS area TCStangs.com guys)
178rwph, 246 rwtq stock
208rwph, 278 rwtq with pullies, O/R Hpipe, and a tuneup

92TSIpos wrote:
Yeah I havent seen any fast thunderbirds or cougars. Are the 5.0 motors the same in the stangs and cougars?

I'm not absolutely sure. Was just browsing through some things and they're rated 200hp/275tq (which is apparently down from the mustang rating).

Intakes are the same as the 94-95 mustang 5.0L (which was a pig in it's self) from what I gather; not sure if cam specs are different or not. (could be choked out from anything from the 55mm MAF to crappy cast manifolds.)

I had taken up interest in a 5.0 bird here a while ago, but after some research I gave up that idea. It was taking those guys a few thousand dollars in parts to run the times I'm running nearly stock with my 4.6L bird.

As far as any of them being fast:
I think the quickest one anyone has seen around here is the Vortech blown 96 3.8L Tbird (13.9s).
(or the MarkVIIIs running mid 14s)
Outside of that, have a couple buddies in MPLS putting out good dyno numbers. 1 car ran 12.8s fighting transmission issues. The power output and drivetrain combo has proven capable of 11s, but he's having some serious issues tweaking the setup (put down 440, then added parts that theoretically should have put him close to 500, but instead went backwards).
And then the other guy who put down 320s IIRC, but will be spraying I think a 150shot with the new motor. Car's a garage queen and hasn't been on the track...yet.
Might see all 3 of those guys up at Brainerd during Muscle Car Shootout.

gunmaster wrote:
I forgot about the eaton. Most of the ones you see driving around are 3.8 n/a's. Hell I tried looking for one. All I find is 3.8 N/A's.

5.0 HO Has a big market for parts. Superchargers,Turbochargers,Even twin turbo setups. I think the 4.6 market is bigger. Then comes the 3.8 supercharge market.

But overall theres no threat. Aaround here seems people arent into cougars and thunderbirds.
pretty unlikely to find an early XR7 (with the SC3.8L) In 5 years, I've seen 2. 1 5 speed and 1 automatic, neither in decent shape. Weren't very many produced to begin with.

5.0 HO cars do have a big market, yes. However there isn't a power adder out there that will bolt on to these cars (and anything in the turbo world is going to take a lot of custom work.
4.6L aftermarket is far from larger than the 5.0L motor. It's finally starting to come around, but prices for parts are still outrageous. (and then add on the fact that the thunderbird/cougar won't use things like headers from the mustang. We're paying $700 for a good mid-length compared to good mustang longtubes going for $450)

There aren't many people 'anywhere' into the thunderbirds/cougars. Hence the reason our particular aftermarket is expensive and sparse. But oh well I guess, it's different.. Not very often you can turn around and see a 450HP Thunderbird.
Don't typically have a BIR announcer stop mid scentence and mutter "wow" when a mustang goes down the track.

blackcougar wrote:
yeah its a 5.0 and it aint fast and i guess it dont really matter as long as its clean and it has a litl power its all good

Its a nice lookin car and thats all its gonna be. If anyone finds a nicer cougar than yours than they can come find me and ill give em 20 bucks

dubbsy wrote:
hey, it could be the ultra fast 3.8L with the eaton....

but yeah, his car is really... really slow. Hell, I beat him.
(the 5.0 put in the birds/cougars wasn't worth a shit. usually takes quite a bit for those guys to even hit 14s without the extra weight of the stereo he has)

still a sharp car though.

I forgot about the eaton. Most of the ones you see driving around are 3.8 n/a's. Hell I tried looking for one. All I find is 3.8 N/A's.

5.0 HO Has a big market for parts. Superchargers,Turbochargers,Even twin turbo setups. I think the 4.6 market is bigger. Then comes the 3.8 supercharge market.

But overall theres no threat. Aaround here seems people arent into cougars and thunderbirds.

92TSIpos wrote:
sorry for speaking for him but its the 5.slow.

Thats alright. Stock that engine shoudve been putting out more atleast 260hp. Why they rated it at 220hp is beyond me. Considering most I4's and V6's were putting out close 220hp or more at that time.

gunmaster wrote:
What engine and what year is your car? 5.0 or 4.6? Or the ultra fast 3.8 n/a v6!

hey, it could be the ultra fast 3.8L with the eaton....

but yeah, his car is really... really slow. Hell, I beat him.
(the 5.0 put in the birds/cougars wasn't worth a shit. usually takes quite a bit for those guys to even hit 14s without the extra weight of the stereo he has)

still a sharp car though.

gunmaster wrote:
What engine and what year is your car? 5.0 or 4.6? Or the ultra fast 3.8 n/a v6!

sorry for speaking for him but its the 5.slow.