!!SLOW COBRA!! Couldn't spin the tires in 1st gear?
mco...@earthlink.net
Hey guys,
As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
buying a slow accelerating car!!!
Any insight would be appreciated
Mike
Angel
My GT has a 3.08:1 rearend which ONCE managed to embarrass a Cobra in the
neighborhood. Soon to be increased to 3.73, with the HP bumped up to 280-285
I'll be able to increase speed/acceleration without the need for dual-cams,
32valves, etc.
Angel
laser-red 94GT (ragtop, 5-spd, HD clutch...)
mco...@earthlink.net wrote in message ...
UF1
mco...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
> local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
> than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
> the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
> clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
> Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
> buying a slow accelerating car!!!
>
> Any insight would be appreciated
>
> Mike
If you can't drive it, don't buy it! Couldn't spin the tires in
first gear...hahahaha!
Puhhhleeezzze!
RC
'97 Blk/Blk Cobra Coupe
Stan
mco...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
> local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
> than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
> the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
> clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
> Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
> buying a slow accelerating car!!!
>
> Any insight would be appreciated
>
> Mike
Something wasnt right either the cobra..or you... 96-98 GT's run low
15's stock.. 96-98 cobras run high 13's stock mine with a change of
gears (3.73) K&N, remove 2 of the 4 cats it came with, and a mass air
runs 13.30's at 105 mph on street radials.. 12.90's on 8" slicks
Stan
Yellow Blk/Blk 98 Cobra
titte...@my-dejanews.com
In article <mcoggi-1806...@pool015-max1.ds18-ca-
us.dialup.earthlink.net>,
mco...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>
> Hey guys,
>
> As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
> local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
> than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
> the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
> clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
> Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
> buying a slow accelerating car!!!
>
> Any insight would be appreciated
>
> Mike
>
I can assure you that unless something was wrong with the Cobra it is much
quicker and better handling then the GT and really the only car to consider
between the two if you
are looking for performance, of course JMHO.
David Tittermary
98 1LE Z28
13.12@109.2 best mph
12.96@107 best et. stock on GSC's
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
tima
Don't worry! First of all, It's a brand new car, which means you need to
wait until
you get around 6k on it before you can actually get really good tire music!
Second of all, you should have plaied with the clutch pedal insead of gas
pedal!
First, you give it about 2000 rpm and then try that pedal!
Go back and try it again!
Tim.
97 Cobra ( Black on Black )
mco...@earthlink.net wrote in message ...
>
>
MarcW
mco...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
> local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
> than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
> the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
> clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
> Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
> buying a slow accelerating car!!!
>
> Any insight would be appreciated
>
> Mike
If Cobra's engine temperature wasn't up to normal operating range yet,
the computer may do something to keep the engine from generating full
power to lessen the possibility of damage due to cold engine oil.
Also, check the air pressure. I found with my '96 GT I was spinning the
tires quite frequently. When I lowered the air pressure (cold) from
around 36PSI down to 30PSI, traction went up quite a bit.
Maybe the Cobra you drove had its tire pressure set at optimum for
traction/ride comfort?
I've never raced my GT against any other cars, but sometimes when
pulling on to the freeway I get someone behind me that thinks they can
keep up. (I don't try this with the faster Porches, Corvettes, and
Camaros/Firebirds.)
I once pulled onto the freeway with what I thought was another Mustang
GT behind me. I accelerated and checked the mirror. Mr. Nonchalant was
still there about the same number of car lengths behind me. More
acceleration. Check mirror. Car still there. Still more acceleration,
upshifting now. Cobra still there.
On the freeway now and moving at freeway speed. Car behind me pulls out
into the fast lane and passes me.
I manage to check it out as it goes by... It's a Cobra, not a GT.
Sincerely,
MarcW.
Oodleoff
Wow I can barely keep mine form spinning most of the time.
RONALD DILLMAN
32 valve Cobras only outperform gt's over 3500 rpm. The intake has
solinoid actuated butterfly valves that open above 3500, otherwise these
are closed. You will also hear a clicking in the dash that ups the fuel
pump speed to feed the other active injectors.
I drove a 32 valve cobra and still prefer my 5.0 cobra. It just feels
stronger and in my opinion is more american at heart. And it does lay
rubber without dumping the clutch!
Jim Manson
mco...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>
>Hey guys,
>
>As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
>local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
>than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
>the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
>clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
>Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
>buying a slow accelerating car!!!
>
>Any insight would be appreciated
>
Either the car is screwed up or you did it wrong. Or they rebadged a
GT...;-)
Spinning tires on my Cobra is extremely simple. Actually the first
time I drove it I did it a couple of times by accident at stop signs.
( change from prior car )
Try another dealership and another Cobra.
NSI Inc
In article <6mecs9$pbt$1...@newsd-133.iap.bryant.webtv.net>, RRDI...@webtv.net
(RONALD DILLMAN) writes:
>32 valve Cobras only outperform gt's over 3500 rpm. The intake has
>solinoid actuated butterfly valves that open above 3500, otherwise these
>are closed. You will also hear a clicking in the dash that ups the fuel
>pump speed to feed the other active injectors.
I hope you aren't implying that the engines in a DOHC below 3500 RPM (By the
way I believe it is 3250 that the secondaries come on) is the same as the SOHC
engine. The two engines are WAY, WAY different.
On the same note, a properly raced Cobra never sees below 3250 RPM, so I guess
it doesn't really matter how it performs below 3250. I've found that the best
way to launch my Cobra is at 4000 RPM. I feather the clutch to prevent
spinning.
AR
'96 Mystic Cobra Coupe
#336 of 2000
STANGBANGR
THATS FUNNY, SEE I DONT LIKE TO LOOSE TRACTION ???? BUT THATS JUST ME
......... IF YOU THINK THAT OLD 5.0 IS FAST , JUST GET THE REVS UP IN THAT
NEW COBRA!!! I SHIFT AT 6800R.P.M SOMETHING THE 5.0 CAN ONLY DREAM OF !!!!!!
STANGBANGR
98 CHROME YELLOW COBRA CONVERT,
13.87 @101MPH, STOCK WITH ONLY
1200 MILES ON IT !!!!
TRY THAT WITH A STOCK 5.0 !!!
emanon
> STANGBANGR
> 98 CHROME YELLOW COBRA CONVERT,
> 13.87 @101MPH, STOCK WITH ONLY
> 1200 MILES ON IT !!!!
> TRY THAT WITH A STOCK 5.0 !!!
I'm impressed with that time... with a convertible. Are other people getting
numbers like that? What are the Cobra coupes doing?
STANGBANGR
COUPES SHOULD BE GOING EASY 13.60 DUE TO THEM BEING 200# LIGHTER ... A FELLOW
COBRA OWNER AT THE TRACK WENT 13.79 STOCK !!!!
SOON TO BE IN THE 12s ALL MOTOR !!!
STANGBANGR,STOCK COBRA
CONVERT,CHROME YELLOW,
13.87 @101MPH, AT SEARS POINT !!
Gary H
On 20 Jun 1998 04:03:56 GMT, stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) wrote:
> THATS FUNNY, SEE I DONT LIKE TO LOOSE TRACTION ???? BUT THATS JUST ME
>......... IF YOU THINK THAT OLD 5.0 IS FAST , JUST GET THE REVS UP IN THAT
>NEW COBRA!!! I SHIFT AT 6800R.P.M SOMETHING THE 5.0 CAN ONLY DREAM OF !!!!!!
>
> STANGBANGR
> 98 CHROME YELLOW COBRA CONVERT,
> 13.87 @101MPH, STOCK WITH ONLY
> 1200 MILES ON IT !!!!
> TRY THAT WITH A STOCK 5.0 !!!
I really hope you don't think your car can beat any 'stock' 5.0. The
'93 Cobras ran very hard, and were able to run 13.8s stock as well.
94 White Firebird Formula
A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
Darren Fonseca
Just FYI I ran 13.2's at 101.8 on my stock 90 5.0 LX hatchback with
3.55 rear with 150,000 miles on the odo. Only changes were removed
front sway bar and had Southside Traction bars. that is even with the
stock pinched headers. Can't wait to get the car back from PJ's next
week. Should run Low 11's when he is done with it.
Brad
STANGBANGR wrote in message
<199806200403...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> THATS FUNNY, SEE I DONT LIKE TO LOOSE TRACTION ???? BUT THATS JUST ME
>......... IF YOU THINK THAT OLD 5.0 IS FAST , JUST GET THE REVS UP IN
THAT
>NEW COBRA!!! I SHIFT AT 6800R.P.M SOMETHING THE 5.0 CAN ONLY DREAM OF
!!!!!!
>
> STANGBANGR
> 98 CHROME YELLOW COBRA CONVERT,
> 13.87 @101MPH, STOCK WITH ONLY
> 1200 MILES ON IT !!!!
> TRY THAT WITH A STOCK 5.0 !!!
You've got to calm down. Try upper and lower case letters. That way, you
don't look like such a moron.
mco...@earthlink.net
Hi again,
I drove the car with a salesman in the passenger seat (he drove it first
and then I drove it back to the dealership, we both drove the car hard).
The car was cold and only had 53 miles on it (far from being broken in).
When both the salesman and I drove it in 1st gear (straight-line
acceleration) we floored it and were surprised to find that the tires
didn't even squeak. Sure it was quick but we expected more. The car
doesn't come close to the 300ZX Twin-Turbo (modified, well over stock 300
HP) my neighbor has. His car turns his Potenzas into liquid rubber when
you put the pedal even half-way down in first gear. I was just wondering
from you Cobra owners out there, what happens when you floor it in 1st
gear with your cars?
Thanx a bunch,
Mike
Jason William Ivany
On Sat, 20 Jun 1998, Gary H wrote:
> On 20 Jun 1998 04:03:56 GMT, stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) wrote:
>
> > THATS FUNNY, SEE I DONT LIKE TO LOOSE TRACTION ???? BUT THATS JUST ME
> >......... IF YOU THINK THAT OLD 5.0 IS FAST , JUST GET THE REVS UP IN THAT
> >NEW COBRA!!! I SHIFT AT 6800R.P.M SOMETHING THE 5.0 CAN ONLY DREAM OF !!!!!!
> >
> > STANGBANGR
> > 98 CHROME YELLOW COBRA CONVERT,
> > 13.87 @101MPH, STOCK WITH ONLY
> > 1200 MILES ON IT !!!!
> > TRY THAT WITH A STOCK 5.0 !!!
>
> I really hope you don't think your car can beat any 'stock' 5.0. The
> '93 Cobras ran very hard, and were able to run 13.8s stock as well.
>
What drugs are you SMOKING!!!!!! I have yet to see any STOCK 5.0
run better than mid 14's stock! And I have seen many run!
for a car of that weight to run 13.8s it would need about 300-310 hp.
With slicks and a factory ringer 5.0 low 14's are believable but 13.8!! I
would have to see it to believe itLast weekend I saw 6 5.0's at the track
and the best run of the 6 was a 13.97 at 100.5mph and this one had exhaust
k&n,headers and slicks! two of the stock ones ran in the 15's with one
doing a best for the day of 15.65 at 92mph (this was a 89 auto) > > 94
STANGBANGR
I DONT THINK PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY STOCK .... BY THIS I MEAN
HOW I DROVE IT OFF THE LOT , NO CONTROL ARMS,,,, NO STRIPPING OF SWAY BARS ,
NOTHING !!
AS FOR A 93 COBRA GOING 13.8
I DONT HAVE ONE , BUT IM SURE ONE OF YOUR FRIENDS DOES , WHAT DID IT RUN OFF
THE LOT , WITHOUT AS MUCH AS CHECKING THE TIRE PRESSURE ???
AND IF YOUR SO WORRIED ABOUT ME USING MY CAPS . GET A LIFE , GET A CAR ,GET
SOME FRIENDS , IF THATS ALL YOU HAVE TO SAY,,,,,,, THATS THE LAST THING I NEED
TO SEE IN THIS ROOM , IS HATE ,,, TAKE YOU AND YOUR YUGO, AND DRIVE OFF A
CLIFF,,,,
STANGBANGR, STOCK!!!!!
COBRA CONVERT 13.87@101MPH
NoOption5L
In article <358c3d66...@news.uscom.com>, Dar...@Fonseca.com (Darren
Fonseca) writes:
>Just FYI I ran 13.2's at 101.8 on my stock 90 5.0 LX hatchback with
>3.55 rear with 150,000 miles on the odo. Only changes were removed
>front sway bar and had Southside Traction bars. that is even with the
>stock pinched headers.
>Can't wait to get the car back from PJ's next
>week. Should run Low 11's when he is done with it.
PJ Performance??? You lucky bast*rd!
Patrick
Black/Grey '87 5 liter 5 speed LX
Gary H
On 21 Jun 1998 04:28:05 GMT, stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) wrote:
> I DONT THINK PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY STOCK .... BY THIS I MEAN
>HOW I DROVE IT OFF THE LOT , NO CONTROL ARMS,,,, NO STRIPPING OF SWAY BARS ,
>NOTHING !!
> AS FOR A 93 COBRA GOING 13.8
> I DONT HAVE ONE , BUT IM SURE ONE OF YOUR FRIENDS DOES , WHAT DID IT RUN OFF
>THE LOT , WITHOUT AS MUCH AS CHECKING THE TIRE PRESSURE ???
I do not know of anyone with a '93 Cobra. Loman Ford in NJ did have a
'93 Cobra some time ago that a friend of mine seriosuly checked into.
MM&FF got a 13.8 out of a '93 Cobra.
> AND IF YOUR SO WORRIED ABOUT ME USING MY CAPS . GET A LIFE , GET A CAR ,GET
>SOME FRIENDS , IF THATS ALL YOU HAVE TO SAY,,,,,,, THATS THE LAST THING I NEED
>TO SEE IN THIS ROOM , IS HATE ,,, TAKE YOU AND YOUR YUGO, AND DRIVE OFF A
>CLIFF,,,,
I'm not 'worried' about you using caps. But when you write in caps it
makes it a bit hard to read your messages, thats all.
SEEverist
STANGBANGR WROTE:
> AND IF YOUR SO WORRIED ABOUT ME USING MY CAPS . GET A LIFE , GET A CAR ,GET
>SOME FRIENDS , IF THATS ALL YOU HAVE TO SAY,,,,,,, THATS THE LAST THING I
>NEED
>TO SEE IN THIS ROOM , IS HATE ,,, TAKE YOU AND YOUR YUGO, AND DRIVE OFF A
>CLIFF,,,,
Haven't we went over this before with you? Don't use all caps, it's as if
you're screaming. As much as you don't want "HATE," I don't want someone
screaming at me. Your first post about your car was fine, what the hell
happened after that? Regardless of speaking the truth, it's hard to take
someone seriously who continues to write in ALL CAPS after being asked not too.
It's not as if it's that hard to change.
Steve
Have:
'71 Buick GS 455 (torque rules!)
'93 Ranger Splash 4x4 4.0
Had:
'86 5.0 coupe (ex-stater)
'88 5.0 coupe ( " " )
http://members.aol.com/SEEverist/GS.html
Darren Fonseca
The one and only. If it runs Low 11's with NO power adders out of 302
ci, then I will be AMAZED!!! Considering that the Stereo and roll
bar will be adding almost 200lbs.
TFrog93
In article
<mcoggi-2006...@pool032-max11.ds19-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net>,
mco...@earthlink.net writes:
Well! Those ultra-sticky ultra-performance tires must be doing the job, then.
What brand are they? I'm just picturing a 1/4-mile launch with NO tire spin.
Perfect.
Spinning tires is for show, anyway. After I bought my first set of
replacements at over $140.00 EACH, I quickly learned that spinning tires was
NOT A GOOD THING. If you want, I'll lend you a pair of fairly worn 225/16s I
have, and you can "light them up" all day.
In the meantime, I'd take the Cobra.
dwight
TFrog93
In article <199806210428...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) writes:
>I DONT THINK PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY
>STOCK .... BY THIS I MEAN HOW I DROVE IT OFF THE LOT , NO
>CONTROL ARMS,,,, NO STRIPPING OF SWAY BARS , NOTHING !!
> AS FOR A 93 COBRA GOING 13.8 I DONT HAVE ONE , BUT
>IM SURE ONE OF YOUR FRIENDS DOES , WHAT DID IT RUN OFF
>THE LOT , WITHOUT AS MUCH AS CHECKING THE TIRE PRESSURE???
> AND IF YOUR SO WORRIED ABOUT ME USING MY CAPS . GET A
>LIFE , GET A CAR ,GET SOME FRIENDS , IF THATS ALL YOU HAVE
>TO SAY,,,,,,, THATS THE LAST THING I NEED TO SEE IN THIS ROOM,
>IS HATE ,,, TAKE YOU AND YOUR YUGO, AND DRIVE OFF A CLIFF,,,,
1.- This is NOT an AOL chat room. The bullshit you spew in there will not fly
out here. All that typing you've done above, and you've said absolutely
nothing of any importance. Please, if you're going to inflict yourself on this
newsgroup, at least have the common courtesy to SAY SOMETHING.
2.- ALL CAPS is not only read as SHOUTING, but is considered rude to the
extreme. You've been asked several times now to stop, and yet you seem to want
to pull an attitude on this point. Don't. If you continue to type in ALL
CAPS, you will be ignored, reviled, or dismissed as another moron AOLer.
Take a hint.
dwight
Stan
emanon wrote:
>
> > STANGBANGR
> > 98 CHROME YELLOW COBRA CONVERT,
> > 13.87 @101MPH, STOCK WITH ONLY
> > 1200 MILES ON IT !!!!
> > TRY THAT WITH A STOCK 5.0 !!!
>
> numbers like that? What are the Cobra coupes doing?
that is a really good et for a covert. .. my coupe ran a best et of
13.84 @ 101.3 stock ( remove air silencer)
Stan
Darren Fonseca wrote:
>
> Just FYI I ran 13.2's at 101.8 on my stock 90 5.0 LX hatchback with
> 3.55 rear with 150,000 miles on the odo. Only changes were removed
> front sway bar and had Southside Traction bars. that is even with the
> stock pinched headers. Can't wait to get the car back from PJ's next
> week. Should run Low 11's when he is done with it.
>
3.55 gear.. naw don't believe it
Gary H
>> I really hope you don't think your car can beat any 'stock' 5.0. The
>> '93 Cobras ran very hard, and were able to run 13.8s stock as well.
>>
>
> What drugs are you SMOKING!!!!!! I have yet to see any STOCK 5.0
>run better than mid 14's stock! And I have seen many run!
>for a car of that weight to run 13.8s it would need about 300-310 hp.
>With slicks and a factory ringer 5.0 low 14's are believable but 13.8!! I
>would have to see it to believe itLast weekend I saw 6 5.0's at the track
>and the best run of the 6 was a 13.97 at 100.5mph and this one had exhaust
>k&n,headers and slicks! two of the stock ones ran in the 15's with one
>doing a best for the day of 15.65 at 92mph (this was a 89 auto) > > 94
>White
>Firebird Formula > A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back > 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
Check out MM&FF. They were able to get a 13.8 out of a bone stock '93
Cobra.
SEEverist
Gary H wrote:
>> What drugs are you SMOKING!!!!!! I have yet to see any STOCK 5.0
>>run better than mid 14's stock! And I have seen many run!
>>for a car of that weight to run 13.8s it would need about 300-310 hp.
>>With slicks and a factory ringer 5.0 low 14's are believable but 13.8!! I
>>would have to see it to believe itLast weekend I saw 6 5.0's at the track
>>and the best run of the 6 was a 13.97 at 100.5mph and this one had exhaust
>>k&n,headers and slicks! two of the stock ones ran in the 15's with one
>>doing a best for the day of 15.65 at 92mph (this was a 89 auto) > > 94
>>White
>>Firebird Formula > A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back > 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
>
>Check out MM&FF. They were able to get a 13.8 out of a bone stock '93
>Cobra.
I have went 14.11 in my stock '88 copstang with over 100,000 miles on it and
14.48 with my '86 coptstang in the same condition (the '86 actually had a
better 60 foot, but wasn't as good on top end). After running them stock a
couple times, they both were treated to SVO clutches, K&N's, synthetic fluids,
and Dynomax mufflers. After that, each lost ET (as result of losing 60 foot
time) but picked up a little mph (abou 1.5-2 mph). But, the fastest speed out
of the '88 (which also had the mass air meter bored) was just over 98mph. I
have a hard time with 101+ mph on a stocker. I know it can be done, I've done
it.
Darren Fonseca
Don't beleive what?? I said 13.20's with a MPH of 101.8. I am damn
proud of that time. It is amazing what can be done when you take the
time to tune what you have. And that was with a 1.79 short time. I
used to love to beat up on the guys with the GT-40 equipment when
nothing was done to mine. These runs were done with OLD M/T 8" wide
slicks on 14 inch cragar rims that I bought off of someone at the
track for $50.00. I have Video tape of me lifting the front left tire
on launch with that set up. Alas, that setup is history, as a puddle
destroyed the motor when water went right up into the intake. I loved
that motor, it just kept getting faster. Now I can't run it as stock
any more, and I probably wont have as much fun.
YZ250Racer
In article <199806211359...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, tfr...@aol.com
wrote:
>Spinning tires is for show, anyway. After I bought my first set of
>replacements at over $140.00 EACH, I quickly learned that spinning tires was
>NOT A GOOD THING. If you want, I'll lend you a pair of fairly worn 225/16s I
>have, and you can "light them up" all day.
A friend of mine has two spare donut tires/rims that he puts on the back of his
Mustang GT (Vortech, and other stuff) every once in a while... It's hilarious
to see this car when he puts them on it, especially if the roads are wet...
I'm really surprised that he hasn't blown the tires (or some drivetrain part)
up yet...
Nicholas, 2 '94 YZ250s, 1995 Trans Am, 1992 Grand Prix (almost sold)
Partner/Event Coordinator, R2 Productions
"Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them"
Samram3
>Don't beleive what?? I said 13.20's with a MPH of 101.8. I am damn
>proud of that time. It is amazing what can be done when you take the
>time to tune what you have. And that was with a 1.79 short time. I
>used to love to beat up on the guys with the GT-40 equipment when
>nothing was done to mine. These runs were done with OLD M/T 8" wide
>slicks on 14 inch cragar rims that I bought off of someone at the
>track for $50.00.
well, if you had a "stock" cobra, using your term of "stock" (using gears,
slicks, removal of some weight, and having traction bars) you would be well
into the 12's. Just thougt the cobra deserved credit with the same "stock"
description as your car.
Darren Fonseca
I agree with your term of Stock, Showroom as is. But after years of
everyone taking stock to mean just factory engine and intake, I have
started to go along with that definition. I think that slicks would
qualify as a stock car no matter what definition you use though. And
just so you know, it ran high 14's even some 15.0's when I first took
it to the track, And then as a FACTORY STOCK car with eagle
Gatorbacks all around, and stock lower control arms, it was down to
13.9's once I got the hang of driving it. Slicks, gears and
Southsides paired that down to the 13.2's I eventually ran. This
combo qualify's under the NHRA rules as SHOWROOM STOCK. and would't be
competitive with other SS mustangs that have run 12.8's.
NSI Inc
>Just FYI I ran 13.2's at 101.8 on my stock 90 5.0 LX hatchback with
>3.55 rear with 150,000 miles on the odo. Only changes were removed
>front sway bar and had Southside Traction bars. that is even with the
>stock pinched headers. Can't wait to get the car back from PJ's next
>week. Should run Low 11's when he is done with it.
>
>
Geesh! Yup, your LX sure was STOCK! You are just like those people that claim
their car (with a little scratch here, a small ding there) is mint. Mint means
perfect. Not perfect except........ Stock means stock...... not stock
except this mod.... that mod.... etc. Even with the stock pinched headers
huh..... according to your definition of stock, you were probably even using
slicks. Yup.... slicks that were driven right off the showroom floor.
NSI Inc
In article <199806211822...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, seev...@aol.com
(SEEverist) writes:
>I have went 14.11 in my stock '88 copstang with over 100,000 miles on it and
>14.48 with my '86 coptstang in the same condition (the '86 actually had a
>better 60 foot, but wasn't as good on top end). After running them stock a
>couple times, they both were treated to SVO clutches, K&N's, synthetic
>fluids,
>and Dynomax mufflers. After that, each lost ET (as result of losing 60 foot
>time) but picked up a little mph (abou 1.5-2 mph). But, the fastest speed
>out
>of the '88 (which also had the mass air meter bored) was just over 98mph. I
>have a hard time with 101+ mph on a stocker. I know it can be done, I've
>done
>it.
>
>
>Steve
>Have:
>'71 Buick GS 455 (torque rules!)
>'93 Ranger Splash 4x4 4.0
>Had:
>'86 5.0 coupe (ex-stater)
>'88 5.0 coupe ( " " )
>http://members.aol.com/SEEverist/GS.html
>
>------------------- Headers --------------------
I'm not trying to give you a hard time Steve but, what's up with the
"copstang". I know of way to many people that have a so-called copstang.
First of all, how do you know it's a copstang. Did you actually buy it from a
police auction or did the guy you bought it from say "oh yea... this used to be
a police patrol car too"... Also, is a copstang actually any different from a
normal stang other than I would guess most copstang have a lot of hard driven
miles on it? The only reason I ask is it seems like a lot of copstangs are
copstangs because it makes them sound cooler. Kinda like my dog is part
wolf...... uh huh.
James Scott
Well my 90 LX Police Issue has little features that were confirmed by my
mechanic ie: the trunk release moved to interier or car from the glove,
the 160mph speedo, the drilled holes for when the air box was in the
car, the holes on the interior trim that held light bar/spotlight
thingees.. and the orig. pink slip that says the word POLICE on it.
--
James Scott
email: bra...@mindless.com
Urizen
I believe the copstangs had 160mph speedos, heavy duty radiator
including an oil cooler and all else the same.
Urizen 89LX 5.0
K&N, Amsoil, MAC equal Shorties & OR H-Pipe,
MSD Coil + Wires, Pro 5.0, 3.55's, Black magic fan,
Flowmaster 2 chambers, 5 stars, 73mm Mass, FMS UD pulleys.
James Scott
Another thing, this car was bought orig. from the CHP with only 16k
miles on it, I got it recently with 69k on it. Not bad for a 90 LX.
(this Copstang thang)
--
James Scott
email: bra...@mindless.com
Jason William Ivany
Where did you find this downhill 1/4 mile track?? There is no way
a stock 90 Lx is going to hit 13's PERIOD!!!with those times and trapspeed
you are talking about a car that has to be putting out at least 270hp.
Now I have seen Lx's with K&n and exhaust and slicks run 13's but a Stock
90 LX no!
GrnCobra
>what's up with the
>"copstang". I know of way to many people that have a so-called copstang.
>First of all, how do you know it's a copstang.
All a police mustang has is better cooling and a little hotter chip, that is
usually removed at the time of auction.
> Kinda like my dog is part
>wolf...... uh huh.
>
And I had a Malamute/Artic wolf mix bitch. She looked exactly like a wolf
though...I had to get rid of her when I joined the navy...
Rexford Dundon AKA GrnCobra
1997 Pacific Green Mustang Cobra Coupe # 2442 of 6961
LXTASY326
Try that with a 5.0? Youre funny, i've seen many 87-93 model 5 oh's do 13.80's
with just bumping the timing to 14 degrees, removing the air silencer, and
adding 3.73 gears. The usual is launching @ 5,000 and shifting around there.
Nice car by the way, too bad you could've bought a nice used 93 model for half
as much.
Darren Fonseca
>> everyone taking stock to mean just factory engine and intake, I have
>> started to go along with that definition. I think that slicks would
>> qualify as a stock car no matter what definition you use though. And
>> just so you know, it ran high 14's even some 15.0's when I first took
>> it to the track, And then as a FACTORY STOCK car with eagle
>> Gatorbacks all around, and stock lower control arms, it was down to
>> 13.9's once I got the hang of driving it. Slicks, gears and
>> Southsides paired that down to the 13.2's I eventually ran. This
>> combo qualify's under the NHRA rules as SHOWROOM STOCK. and would't be
>> competitive with other SS mustangs that have run 12.8's.
>>>
> Where did you find this downhill 1/4 mile track?? There is no way
>a stock 90 Lx is going to hit 13's PERIOD!!!with those times and trapspeed
>you are talking about a car that has to be putting out at least 270hp.
>Now I have seen Lx's with K&n and exhaust and slicks run 13's but a Stock
>90 LX no!
>
Well Jason, I am not going to try to convince you what I ran. It
just isn't worth it. And I am not bragging because similar cars with
no engine mods have gone faster. The tracks in question are
Englishtown Nj and Atco NJ.
SEEverist
NSI wrote:
>I'm not trying to give you a hard time Steve but, what's up with the
>"copstang". I know of way to many people that have a so-called copstang.
>First of all, how do you know it's a copstang.
<snip>
I call it a copstang, because it takes up less room than ex-police Mustang.
Yes, both of mine used to be patrol cars. Nobody has ever doubted this before,
you can check the many old threads about what is different on special service
mustangs.
First, my '86 was bought from the guy who bought it at the auction. No, it
didn't have the folder of info that you get at the auctions (I used to go to
them all the time). But, it had/has lots of different stuff:
1st, there is no special chip (like some people think)
2nd, it has ground straps everywhere on the car
3rd, no sound deadenor (sp) under the hood and it never did
4th, 160 mph certified calibration speedo
5th, remote trunk release under the dash
6th, little lever attached to throttle cable that locks in idle speed to keep
the lights and accessories going at idle
7th, markings with date under hood that I've never seen on a standard 5.0 LX
(probably fleet markings)
8th, Holes in the floor where the roll bar was attached
9th, Hole in the pillar where the spotlight was attached
10th, Dents on the roof where the light bar was clamped down, along with holes
where wiring was secured,
11th, I think you have the point on this one.
Now, my '88 had all of the same options as the '86 plus the benefit of the
following:
12th, Mass air meter (California 'stangs got 'em too in '88)
13th, Oil cooler
14th, Remote gas door release under dash next to the trunk release
15th, Still had the wig-wag switch (disconnected, and didn't have the
opportunity to try and hook it up before I swapped it out)
16th, Additional holes in dash and console for mounting of radio/light
equipment
17th, Aluminum brake shields (??)
18th, Reinforced floorboards
19th, Alternator that looks like the current 4.6 althernators (internal fan)
Neither car had the blue silicone hoses when I bought them, but no big deal.
I hope that proves it to your satisfaction. Both cars were bought with about
94,000 miles on them and were sold with 150,000 and 162,000 miles on them. My
dad also had an '86 copstang that was just like mine, except his '86 had the
really big alternator and mine did not.
You can see pictures of them along with other cars I've had/have at my web page
(address below)
STANGBANGR
why is everyone in this room fighting over something i said in this room ????
i said , try that in a stock 5.0 ... by that i ment shifting at 6800rpm.... ok
room,,, everyone calm down and put your pants back on ,,, and for everyone what
cant read ,as for the other thing i said STOCK ,,, THE WAY IT CAME OFF THE LOT
!!!!!!!! no gears ,,, no slicks, no bumped timing,nothing but some good
driving ,,,, lets see all your lx's do that ,,,
STANGBANGR
STOCK 98 COBRA CONVERT,
CHROME YELLOW,13.87@101MPH
SEEverist
STANGBANGR wrote:
> why is everyone in this room fighting over something i said in this room
>????
>i said , try that in a stock 5.0 ... by that i ment shifting at 6800rpm....
Why would someone want to rev a stock 5.0 to 6800? I don't get it. You're
asking us to take a motor not made to rev that high and do it? What if someone
with a bike said something akin to, "I shift a 13,000 rpm with my bike stock
off the showroom floor, try that with your 4.6 DOHC!" That would be equally as
stupid a challenge.
>lets see all your lx's do that
You're the one making a stupid challenge. Anyone here with a bike wanna
challange STANGBANGR to an rpm contest?
STANGBANGR
so are we talking about motorcycles or mustangs ??? and the point about reving
a 5.0 to 6.800 RPM,,,, thats the point u cant ,,,,, DONT BRING MOTORCYCLES
INTO THIS ,,,, i guess you dont want to say anyhitng about your lx's running
13s stock ???? thats what i thought ,,, you just want to think that a car
ford made 10 years ago is as fast, as a new cobra , and thats fine, go right
ahead , just dont put my car down ,,,,,, we are all mustang owners ,and should
get along ,,,,,
stangbangr,STOCKchromeyellowcobra
convert,13.87@101
SEEverist
STANGBANGR WROTE:
>so are we talking about motorcycles or mustangs ??? and the point about
>reving
>a 5.0 to 6.800 RPM,,,, thats the point u cant ,,,,, DONT BRING MOTORCYCLES
>INTO THIS
I don't remember anyone, especially myself, ever saying that the old motors are
the same as the new ones. That's like comparing the new cars to the musclecars
of the 60's or early 70's. It's apples and oranges, so I brought in a pear
(bike)
.>i guess you dont want to say anyhitng about your lx's running
>13s stock ????
Nope, I can't do that. Since I didn't buy it new off the showroom floor, I
can't meet your criteria. But, I did go 14.11 @ 98 with my '88. The 2.14 60
foot time told me (so did my 1200 rpm launches) that it had more in it with
stickier tires. But, it never went 13, so I won't say it did.
>you just want to think that a car
>ford made 10 years ago is as fast, as a new cobra
I did? I know better than that, since I've seen Anthony's Cobra and some
others perform.
>and thats fine, go right
>ahead , just dont put my car down ,,,,,, we are all mustang owners ,and
>should
>get along ,,,,,
I haven't, and I'm not (anymore). We can get along if we try and be reasonable
(good luck). And if we decide not to spend all our times SHOUTING in our posts
(i.e. 3.73 or 4.11 gears?)
NoOption5L
In article <Pine.OSF.3.95.98062...@plato.ucs.mun.ca>, Jason
William Ivany <d33...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca> writes:
>What drugs are you SMOKING!!!!!! I have yet to see any STOCK 5.0
>run better than mid 14's stock!
Jason, you need to get out more.
Give me a fax number and I'll send you copies of mine. 14.2 @ 98 UNpower
shifted.
>And I have seen many run!
>for a car of that weight to run 13.8s
For a stock 5 liter LX, 13.8s are only traction away.
>it would need about 300-310 hp.
Please.
>With slicks and a factory ringer 5.0 low 14's are believable but 13.8!!
I have articles of 13.75 @100 on street tires, with only timing and the air box
delete mod.
>I
>would have to see it to believe itLast weekend I saw 6 5.0's at the track
>and the best run of the 6 was a 13.97 at 100.5mph and this one had exhaust
>k&n,headers and slicks!
Mine now runs (with these same mods) these numbers on street tires and
through the cats.
>two of the stock ones ran in the 15's with one
>doing a best for the day of 15.65 at 92mph (this was a 89 auto) > > 94
A 92 trap should get you high 14's.
Patrick
Black/Grey '87 5 liter 5 speed LX
NoOption5L
In article <Pine.OSF.3.95.980622...@plato.ucs.mun.ca>, Jason
William Ivany <d33...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca> writes:
>Where did you find this downhill 1/4 mile track??
You only need a sea level track with good air.
>There is no way a stock 90 Lx is going to hit 13's PERIOD!!!
Super Stock Magazine's project car ran 14.04 only with timing, air box delete,
on factory 2.73s.
>with those times and trapspeed you are talking about a car that has to be
putting out at least 270hp.
Yea right.
>Now I have seen Lx's with K&n and exhaust and slicks run 13's but a Stock
>90 LX no!
Super Car Magazine ran a car optioned like mine (no options) to a 13.75
@ 100 with the same timing and air box mods. Then with a set of McCrearys
they got down to 13.50s. After removing the front and rear sway bars they
got 13.43 @ 101.10. Eventually, somehow, they managed to get a 12.9 with
the addition of a short belt, real slicks, and a very hard launch, without any
bolt
on parts. Driver and traction have as much to do about good ETs as HP.
Jason you also need to find a recent copy of MM&FF magazine that had
near stock 5 liter LX running in the 12's.
SEEverist
stangbangr wrote:
> have a nice day !!! oh by the way ,,,, why dont you now have a mustang ???
Hey, thanks.
That's easy, because I found a GS 455, and I missed the feel of a 400+ cubic
inch big block. For the price I couldn't find a big block '69 Mach 1 which
would be my first choice of Mustang big block. Plus I've been into Buicks
longer than I've been driving.
STANGBANGR
nobody is shouting,,,, :O)
UF1
NSI Inc wrote:
>
> In article <6mecs9$pbt$1...@newsd-133.iap.bryant.webtv.net>, RRDI...@webtv.net
> (RONALD DILLMAN) writes:
>
> >32 valve Cobras only outperform gt's over 3500 rpm. The intake has
> >solinoid actuated butterfly valves that open above 3500, otherwise these
> >are closed. You will also hear a clicking in the dash that ups the fuel
> >pump speed to feed the other active injectors.
That's 3250 rpms, not 3500. Also you are wrong about the fuel pump
speed
increasing to feed "other" injectors. They are all fed even at lower
rpms.
The sequence doesn't change but the fuel pressure increases to meet
the higher fuel demand.
> On the same note, a properly raced Cobra never sees below 3250 RPM, so I guess
> it doesn't really matter how it performs below 3250. I've found that the best
> way to launch my Cobra is at 4000 RPM. I feather the clutch to prevent
> spinning.
This is an excellent point that MOST people miss. When I race my Cobra,
the
rpms NEVER drop near 3250. The people that actually think the 3250 mark
is anything that comes into play have never driven or raced against a
DOHC
Cobra...period.
Let's not start a 5.0L is better than a 4.6L thread again. Many of us,
myself included ('88 GT, 110000 miles), have previously owned 5.0 and
know their virtues and faults better than some of you. I have raced
my '97 Cobra against many 5.0Ls and have never lost or had a race even
come close. The 5.0L IS an excellent motor and can be purchased very
cheaply and very easily modified. Bottom line is Ford isn't using this
platform anymore. The DOHC 4.6L is a better engine straight out of the
box and responds very well to mods. However, if you want to race your
5.0L against a new Cobra, you will NEED mods to win, though many have
thought otherwise before racing against me ;-)
Buy what you can afford, modify if you feel the need. If you don't
own one, don't be surprised if we tell you that you don't know
what you are talking about.
RC
NSI Inc
In article <199806230519...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
noopt...@aol.com (NoOption5L) writes:
>Jason you also need to find a recent copy of MM&FF magazine that had
>near stock 5 liter LX running in the 12's.
>
>
>Patrick
>
>Black/Grey '87 5 liter 5 speed LX
If I remember correctly all you guys are arguing different things. I believe
that the original quote that started the bickering was the following:
>There is no way a stock 90 Lx is going to hit 13's PERIOD!!!
The keyword here is "stock". I think that everyone here can agree that for the
sake of this argument stock means COMPLETELY stock. Right off the showroom
floor. No mods, adjustments, stickier tires etc. If this isn't the definition
of stock, then what is the point of even quantifying that a car is stock. To
you that could mean bumping the timing and letting the engine breath. To
someone else it could mean still using the original engine block. To someone
else it could mean..... well, you get the idea. To this date, I believe that
no one has shown that a "stock 90 Lx" can run 13's. Many have shown that it
doesn't take many mods or adjustments to make one do 13's, but not stock.
Hopefully this will end this brotherly bickering so that we can get back to
arguing about more interesting stuff like topend speeds and LS1 1/4 mile times.
Oh yea, and don't forget about the rice rocket wars either.
Gary H
On 23 Jun 1998 04:13:03 GMT, stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) wrote:
> why is everyone in this room fighting over something i said in this room ????
>i said , try that in a stock 5.0 ... by that i ment shifting at 6800rpm.... ok
>room,,, everyone calm down and put your pants back on ,,, and for everyone what
>cant read ,as for the other thing i said STOCK ,,, THE WAY IT CAME OFF THE LOT
>!!!!!!!! no gears ,,, no slicks, no bumped timing,nothing but some good
>driving ,,,, lets see all your lx's do that ,,,
>
>STANGBANGR
>STOCK 98 COBRA CONVERT,
>CHROME YELLOW,13.87@101MPH
I think people resented the comment about the 5.0. Lets not forget
that your Cobra costs about twice as much as older LX 5.0s.
Gary H
On 23 Jun 1998 04:21:30 GMT, seev...@aol.com (SEEverist) wrote:
>STANGBANGR wrote:
>
>> why is everyone in this room fighting over something i said in this room
>>????
>>i said , try that in a stock 5.0 ... by that i ment shifting at 6800rpm....
>
>Why would someone want to rev a stock 5.0 to 6800? I don't get it. You're
>asking us to take a motor not made to rev that high and do it? What if someone
>with a bike said something akin to, "I shift a 13,000 rpm with my bike stock
>off the showroom floor, try that with your 4.6 DOHC!" That would be equally as
>stupid a challenge.
Uhm, guys, I will take this a step further. Lets see a Cobra run a
decent time by shifting at 5200. Won't happen....
Gary H
On 23 Jun 1998 04:38:01 GMT, stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) wrote:
>so are we talking about motorcycles or mustangs ??? and the point about reving
>a 5.0 to 6.800 RPM,,,, thats the point u cant ,,,,, DONT BRING MOTORCYCLES
>INTO THIS ,,,, i guess you dont want to say anyhitng about your lx's running
>13s stock ???? thats what i thought ,,, you just want to think that a car
>ford made 10 years ago is as fast, as a new cobra , and thats fine, go right
>ahead , just dont put my car down ,,,,,, we are all mustang owners ,and should
>get along ,,,,,
>
>stangbangr,STOCKchromeyellowcobra
>convert,13.87@101
Yes, you should all get along....and comments about a 5.0 revving to
6800 are unneeded....Lets see you run a decent time by short shifting
at 5400 like a 5.0 might do....Won't happen.
UF1
SNIP
> I think people resented the comment about the 5.0. Lets not forget
> that your Cobra costs about twice as much as older LX 5.0s.
>
While this is true, it isn't a fair comparison. The '95 5.0L
Cobra wasn't much cheaper than the '98 4.6L Cobra....and the
'95 Cobra was also twice as much as the older LXs.
Compare http://crunch.colorado.edu/cobra/gifs/davis-sticker.gif
('95 Cobra includes destination charges = $24,555)
to http://www.fordvehicles.com/SVT/month.html
('98 Cobra includes destination charges = $26,155)
Just the facts...
RC
NoOption5L
>> I think people resented the comment about the 5.0. Lets not forget
>> that your Cobra costs about twice as much as older LX 5.0s.
>>
>While this is true, it isn't a fair comparison. The '95 5.0L
>Cobra wasn't much cheaper than the '98 4.6L Cobra....and the
>'95 Cobra was also twice as much as the older LXs.
Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
NoOption5L
>Let's not start a 5.0L is better than a 4.6L thread again.
The 5L vs 4.6L debate will never end. Both engines have +s and -s.
Depends on your priorities.
>Many of us,
>myself included ('88 GT, 110000 miles), have previously owned 5.0 and
>know their virtues and faults better than some of you.
>I have raced
>my '97 Cobra against many 5.0Ls and have never lost or had a race even
>come close.
>"never lost or had a race even come close."
What's wrong with those 5 liters that your racing? Cobras typically run
99 - 101 trap speeds ('98s seem to be posting a bit higher numbers / maybe
Ford is playing around with the computer?) and 5 liters should run similiar
numbers with very slight mods (is there any 5 liters left without a few
tweaks?).
So, for NO 5 liters to win or even come close?......
I recently had a Cobra owner tell me, "I thought I could be any 5 liter
car." This was after I beat him by 2 tenths. He never was able to post
a higher trap speed or better ET than my LX that day. But, I'm not going
to give him a rematch! Something about a Vortech S/C he *now* has
under his hood....
He promises to give me a drive in it the next time we head to the track;
and you can be *sure* I'll post my impressions of the car to the group!
>The 5.0L IS an excellent motor and can be purchased very
>cheaply and very easily modified. Bottom line is Ford isn't using this
>platform anymore. The DOHC 4.6L is a better engine straight out of the
>box and responds very well to mods. However, if you want to race your
>5.0L against a new Cobra, you will NEED mods to win, though many have
>thought otherwise before racing against me ;-)
What numbers has your Cobra posted at the track?
GrnCobra
>Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
>for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
>Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
>
I will find out as soon as one of the guys at work gets his 98 Z-28 broke in.
He just got it 3 days ago, had 268 miles on it and paid 28650 for it. It's a 6
speed fully loaded. I have a 97 Cobra , fully loaded and paid 26,500 for it.
James Stoltz
GrnCobra wrote in message
<199806240706...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Your co-worker needs to take a class in negotiation skills. He
paid a boatload 'o money for that thang - especially if it's not an
SS. If you add up the MSRP base (which no one in their right
mind pays on a car that GM can't move off the lots) and the
MSRP for all the options (which is silly because you can't have
*all* the options, some are redundant) you can't get to $28650.
Tell your friend I have a bridge for sale....
Jim
UF1
NoOption5L wrote:
>
SNIP
>
> Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
> for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
> Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
>
>
> Black/Grey '87 5 liter 5 speed LX
Only if you are talking about the SS with similar options.
Visit http://www.popularmechanics.com/popmech/auto2/9708AUTKAP.html
and look at the prices for yourself. As a matter of fact, look
at any magazines comparisons and see the "AS TESTED" price that
compare the Cobra to the SS or Firehawk.
1997 Prices:
Cobra $27,490
Camaro SS $29,801
Firehawk $31,473
Now in '98, the prices on the Cobra have dropped.
Per http://www.fordvehicles.com/SVT/month.html
The manufacturer's suggested retail price of a 1998 SVT Mustang
Cobra Coupe is $26,155; the Cobra Convertible model carries a
base price of $28,955. Both prices include destination and
delivery charges.
Ford no longer makes an LX and will never offer a Cobra
engine in a stipped down Mustang chassis. It is their
"elite" engine and would diminish its' status if you
could buy the same engine in an "ecomony car".
RC
UF1
NoOption5L wrote:
>
SNIP
>
> >I have raced
> >my '97 Cobra against many 5.0Ls and have never lost or had a race even
> >come close.
>
> >"never lost or had a race even come close."
>
> What's wrong with those 5 liters that your racing?
Absolutely nothing. Most run high 14s, low 15s stock. Most
Cobras run high 13s stock.
> Cobras typically run
> 99 - 101 trap speeds ('98s seem to be posting a bit higher numbers / maybe
> Ford is playing around with the computer?) and 5 liters should run similiar
> numbers with very slight mods (is there any 5 liters left without a few
> tweaks?).
A FULL SECOND in a 1/4 mile race is
a significant loss. They may be going the same speed at
that distance but I already have a FULL SECOND to go even
faster and farther.
> So, for NO 5 liters to win or even come close?......
Let me be VERY clear on this point..."I" have never had
one even come close. There will come a day when I run
across one with enough mods to hand me my hat but it
hasn't happened yet. Unlike some, when this day does
happen, I won't feel the need to go out and buy more go
fast goodies. Racing isn't the primary purpose for my
purchase of this vehicle. It is a daily driver that
has a benefit of being damned fast. Creating a monster
that becomes less streetable for daily use doesn't interest
me.
> I recently had a Cobra owner tell me, "I thought I could be any 5 liter
> car." This was after I beat him by 2 tenths.
To think a Cobra could beat any 5.0L is a foolish idea. I
can beat unmodified Mustangs (fair comparison since mine is
completely stock right down to the air silencer). Hand your
buddy any Mustang rag and show him a 5.0L with the front
wheels in the air! While these type of vehicles are an awesome
sight at the track, I have NEVER seen one on the street.
OBTW, today's outside temp is a bit lower today...only 97 degrees
on the beach. :-)
> But, I'm not going
> to give him a rematch! Something about a Vortech S/C he *now* has
> under his hood....
Hey, he adds 1 single mod and now you don't want to race? He was
fair enough to race against your modified Stang. Hee hee!
> What numbers has your Cobra posted at the track?
I haven't taken the Cobra to the track yet. Temps are too high
to even consider going. I'm really more into the impromptu light
to light street race anyway.
> Patrick
> Black/Grey '87 5 liter 5 speed LX
RC
'97 Blk/Blk Cobra Coupe
Stan
Actually thats not true although my DOHC revs to 6800 i dont shift there
th motor starts to flatten out around 6200
1st -- 6500rpm
2nd -- 6200rpm
3rd -- 6000
These are my shift points,i ran a 13.42 @ 104.9 and my car breathes a
little better than it did stock(removed 2 of the 4 cats,3.73's and
ported the mass air)this time was run on a very hot and muggy day 92 deg
with a 2.29 60 foot time the car will run 13.20's i believe ... i would
still et in the mid 13's shifting at 5400 rpm's
Stan
> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
again not true ... i have no doubt that my car will run in the 13's
shifting even at 5200
Stan
Gary H wrote:
>
> On 23 Jun 1998 04:13:03 GMT, stang...@aol.com (STANGBANGR) wrote:
>
> > why is everyone in this room fighting over something i said in this room ????
> >room,,, everyone calm down and put your pants back on ,,, and for everyone what
> >cant read ,as for the other thing i said STOCK ,,, THE WAY IT CAME OFF THE LOT
> >!!!!!!!! no gears ,,, no slicks, no bumped timing,nothing but some good
> >driving ,,,, lets see all your lx's do that ,,,
> >
> >STANGBANGR
> >STOCK 98 COBRA CONVERT,
> >CHROME YELLOW,13.87@101MPH
>
> that your Cobra costs about twice as much as older LX 5.0s.
>
> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
Is this supposed to be a bad thing..
we can afford it .. my house cost twice as much as most peoples.. its
nothing to complain about
98 Yellow Cobra
13.42 @ 104.9
NSI Inc
In article <199806240540...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
noopt...@aol.com (NoOption5L) writes:
>Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
>for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
>Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
All depends on how much someone pays for the Cobra and the Z-28. It definately
wouldn't be the norm, but I could see it happening. You should see how much
they are asking for the SS Camaro anf the Firehawk. Those extra 15 hp (which I
hear may not exist) you pay dearly. And in terms of the Cobra being faster....
according to what I've seen at the local tracks, they are so close to each
other that making a statement like "Cobras are faster than Z-28's" or vice
versa is just plain dumb. Some Cobras are faster.... some are slower.
Gary H
On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:46:13 GMT, Stan <sta...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>Gary H wrote:
>> Yes, you should all get along....and comments about a 5.0 revving to
>> 6800 are unneeded....Lets see you run a decent time by short shifting
>> at 5400 like a 5.0 might do....Won't happen.
>>
>> 94 White Firebird Formula
>> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
>> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
>
>Actually thats not true although my DOHC revs to 6800 i dont shift there
>th motor starts to flatten out around 6200
>1st -- 6500rpm
>2nd -- 6200rpm
>3rd -- 6000
>These are my shift points,i ran a 13.42 @ 104.9 and my car breathes a
>little better than it did stock(removed 2 of the 4 cats,3.73's and
>ported the mass air)this time was run on a very hot and muggy day 92 deg
>with a 2.29 60 foot time the car will run 13.20's i believe ... i would
>still et in the mid 13's shifting at 5400 rpm's
MM&FF got their best times shifting below redline as well.
Gary H
On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:48:51 GMT, Stan <sta...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>> Uhm, guys, I will take this a step further. Lets see a Cobra run a
>> decent time by shifting at 5200. Won't happen....
>>
>> 94 White Firebird Formula
>> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
>> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
>
>again not true ... i have no doubt that my car will run in the 13's
>shifting even at 5200
I'd love to see a stock Cobra get somewhere close to the 13s shifting
at 5200. No way.
Gary H
On 24 Jun 1998 07:06:22 GMT, grnc...@aol.com (GrnCobra) wrote:
>>Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
>>for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
>>Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
>>
>
>
>
>
>I will find out as soon as one of the guys at work gets his 98 Z-28 broke in.
>He just got it 3 days ago, had 268 miles on it and paid 28650 for it. It's a 6
>speed fully loaded. I have a 97 Cobra , fully loaded and paid 26,500 for it.
Who do these people pay this high prices for these cars? $28,650 for
a damn 6 speed Z28? Geesh! That guy doesn't sound to bright!
Gary H
On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:51:37 GMT, Stan <sta...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>>
>> I think people resented the comment about the 5.0. Lets not forget
>> that your Cobra costs about twice as much as older LX 5.0s.
>>
>> 94 White Firebird Formula
>> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
>> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
>
>Is this supposed to be a bad thing..
>we can afford it .. my house cost twice as much as most peoples.. its
>nothing to complain about
>
>98 Yellow Cobra
>13.42 @ 104.9
I don't think we were talking about houses here, but I am glad to know
you have a nice house. I care, really, I do....'We can afford it'
means nothing. I was just making a point that Stangbanger seems to
want to get into a 5.0 Vs. 4.6 DOHC war. I am just pointing out that
the 5.0 was the bang for the buck champ. The 4.6 may be a tad faster
but costs alot more.
UF1
Gary H wrote:
SNIP
> I am just pointing out that
> the 5.0 was the bang for the buck champ. The 4.6 may be a tad faster
> but costs alot more.
You are comparing 1980 prices to 1998 prices which isn't a
straight forward number for number transfer. What kind
of performance car would you expect to buy new today for
$10K? This is why I showed you a '95 5.0L Cobra compared
to a '98 4.6L Cobra. The prices were VERY close.
Yes, prices DO increase. Who would have believed back in the
80's that minivans and SUVs could cost $25K-30K+ and something
as big-n-ugly as a Suburban could go for more than $40K?
Times change...but so does my paycheck. I'm definetly making
a bunch more money today then I was back in the 80's! :-)
RC
TFrog93
In article <199806240540...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
noopt...@aol.com (NoOption5L) writes:
> Cobras typically run 99 - 101 trap speeds ('98s seem to be posting a bit
>higher numbers / maybe Ford is playing around with the computer?) and
>5 liters should run similiar numbers with very slight mods (is there any
>5 liters left without a few tweaks?).
(Hand rising sheepishly...)
:()
NoOption5L
In article <6mqsfl$9...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>, "James Stoltz"
<jst...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>>Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
>>>for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
>>>Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
>>>
>>
>>I will find out as soon as one of the guys at work gets his 98 Z-28 broke
>in.
>>He just got it 3 days ago, had 268 miles on it and paid 28650 for it. It's
>a 6
>>speed fully loaded. I have a 97 Cobra , fully loaded and paid 26,500 for
>it.
>>
>>Rexford Dundon AKA GrnCobra
>>1997 Pacific Green Mustang Cobra Coupe # 2442 of 6961
>
>
>Your co-worker needs to take a class in negotiation skills. He
>paid a boatload 'o money for that thang - especially if it's not an
>SS. If you add up the MSRP base (which no one in their right
>mind pays on a car that GM can't move off the lots) and the
>MSRP for all the options (which is silly because you can't have
>*all* the options, some are redundant) you can't get to $28650.
>
>Tell your friend I have a bridge for sale....
>
>Jim
Thanks Jim, I couldn't have said it better.
NoOption5L
>> Here's a better comparision. In '88, a faster 5 liter LX could be had
>> for about 2K less than a slower Z-28. 10 years later, can a faster
>> Cobra be had for 2K less than a slower Z-28?
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> Black/Grey '87 5 liter 5 speed LX
>
>Only if you are talking about the SS with similar options.
>Visit http://www.popularmechanics.com/popmech/auto2/9708AUTKAP.html
>and look at the prices for yourself. As a matter of fact, look
>at any magazines comparisons and see the "AS TESTED" price that
>compare the Cobra to the SS or Firehawk.
Money spent on a SS or WS6 is money wasted. If your going to buy
a LS1 twin, buy a garden variety model (20K) and with the money saved
add your own mods. Then say, bye bye WS6/SS/Cobra.
NoOption5L
>Actually thats not true although my DOHC revs to 6800 i dont shift there
>the motor starts to flatten out around 6200
>1st -- 6500rpm
>2nd -- 6200rpm
>3rd -- 6000
>These are my shift points,i ran a 13.42 @ 104.9 and my car breathes a
>little better than it did stock(removed 2 of the 4 cats,3.73's and
>ported the mass air)this time was run on a very hot and muggy day 92 deg
>with a 2.29 60 foot time the car will run 13.20's i believe ...
> i would
>still et in the mid 13's shifting at 5400 rpm's
Are yah sure? Normal shift point is over 6000 and you think you can
short shift it (a 1000 rpm less) and only lose a tenth or so??? Right!
Stan
Gary H wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:48:51 GMT, Stan <sta...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> >> Uhm, guys, I will take this a step further. Lets see a Cobra run a
> >> decent time by shifting at 5200. Won't happen....
> >>
> >> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
> >> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
> >
> >shifting even at 5200
>
> I'd love to see a stock Cobra get somewhere close to the 13s shifting
> at 5200. No way.
>
> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
ahhh true not a stock one, i'll give you that, mid maybe low 14's
Stan
> >Is this supposed to be a bad thing..
> >we can afford it .. my house cost twice as much as most peoples.. its
> >nothing to complain about
> >
> >98 Yellow Cobra
> >13.42 @ 104.9
>
> I don't think we were talking about houses here, but I am glad to know
> you have a nice house. I care, really, I do....'We can afford it'
> means nothing. I was just making a point that Stangbanger seems to
> the 5.0 was the bang for the buck champ. The 4.6 may be a tad faster
> but costs alot more.
>
> A4 3.23, K&N, Edelbrock Cat-Back
> 13.66 @ 100.56 MPH
um..ahhh ok, whatever
Stan
UF1 wrote:
>
> Gary H wrote:
>
> SNIP
> > I am just pointing out that
> > the 5.0 was the bang for the buck champ. The 4.6 may be a tad faster
> > but costs alot more.
>
> straight forward number for number transfer. What kind
> of performance car would you expect to buy new today for
> $10K? This is why I showed you a '95 5.0L Cobra compared
> to a '98 4.6L Cobra. The prices were VERY close.
>
> Yes, prices DO increase. Who would have believed back in the
> 80's that minivans and SUVs could cost $25K-30K+ and something
> as big-n-ugly as a Suburban could go for more than $40K?
> Times change...but so does my paycheck. I'm definetly making
> a bunch more money today then I was back in the 80's! :-)
>
> RC
not me.... god i loved the 80's, i make really good money today but
nothing like back then
Gary H
On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 18:43:49 GMT, UF1 <SP...@LESS.NET> wrote:
>You are comparing 1980 prices to 1998 prices which isn't a
>straight forward number for number transfer. What kind
>of performance car would you expect to buy new today for
>$10K? This is why I showed you a '95 5.0L Cobra compared
>to a '98 4.6L Cobra. The prices were VERY close.
>
>Yes, prices DO increase. Who would have believed back in the
>80's that minivans and SUVs could cost $25K-30K+ and something
>as big-n-ugly as a Suburban could go for more than $40K?
>Times change...but so does my paycheck. I'm definetly making
>a bunch more money today then I was back in the 80's! :-)
>
>RC
And I don't care what anyone says the SN95 is a better all around car
then the Fox Mustangs. They have better brakes, better build quality,
and better ride/handling mix. I was just playing devil's advocate.
Your point is well taken, and I agree. One thing though, back in '88
or so I think a 5.0LX could be had for $10,000. Today, nothing can
run with that for even twice the money from Ford. And I don't think
everyone is making twice what they were making back in '88. I just
wish Ford would make a stripper 4.6. I rarely see Cobras without
leather. The '95 Cobra I was in had saddle cloth and it was plenty
nice. Also, am I the only person who never uses AC? I could buy a
car without AC, and power seats are a waste!
Psycho
So if you don't buy the original brand of tires it's not a stock
car anymore huh? Do platinum plugs void a "stock" car status?
What about type of oil, antifreeze, air pressure in tires(
if one tire was 3lb low when you got it should you keep it
that way)? What about window tint, air fresheners, or
leather protectant sprays? What if your car has an adj
suspension and it came with the switch in normal as opposed to
performance, would it change the stock status to flip the
switch? Do you have to maintain the correct level of gas to
remain stock? Bottom line, any replaceables ie oil, spark
plugs, air filter, tires can't void a stock car status other
wise no cars would ever win a show in the stock categories other
than a new car. Having said that, I've never seen a "stock"
'90 LX run 13's. My not so stock '85 will do it though.
NoOption5L
In article <199806242219...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, tfr...@aol.com
(TFrog93) writes:
>>(is there any 5 liters left without a few tweaks?).
>(Hand rising sheepishly...)
Air box?...timing?...nothing? Oh wait, you have suspension tweaks.
Put that hand back down!
Stan
I can't believe that even you take this post seriously
all of the above mentioned items (except tires) aftermarket vs stock
may change your et by a 10th maybe 10th 1/2 ....
however you thake a so called STOCK car remove sway bars, add slicks,
and shocks(90.10 or such) and you go from a 2.1 60 foot to a 1.6 60 foot
thats a half a second in just 60 feet, whitch means 6-7 tenths better
et's ..
This is what i mean about not being stock
when people ask me what my cobra runs i don't tell them 12.80-90's
that is however what the car will run with afore mentioned mods
Stan
yellow 98 cobra
13.42 @ 105.22
David W. McFarland
mco...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> As a future Cobra buyer, I am very worried. I test drove a Cobra at the
> local dealership and was disappointed. It didn't seem that much quicker
> than the GT Mustang (with optional 3.27 rear gear) I test drove earlier
> the same day. I floored it in 1st gear (once in gear, not dumping the
> clutch) and could never gt the tires to spin out (not even a squeak!!).
> Where's the 300 ft-lbs of torque and 305-HP?? I am worried I might be
> buying a slow accelerating car!!!
>
> Any insight would be appreciated
>
> Mike
--
Nuff said maybe not. All of you auot masters out there advising of
computer programming and tire pressure, what the hell about traction
control!!!! Idiots
David McFarland
*mc...@gate.net
Due to spam yadda, yadda, yadda, you know what to do.
9.09 @ 81.4 122k on longblock and I don't even have pullies
"You stick to driving the typewriter and I'll stick to driving the race
cars."
- Freejack
NSI Inc
In article <359238...@Cyrix.com>, Psycho <to...@Cyrix.com> writes:
>So if you don't buy the original brand of tires it's not a stock
>car anymore huh? Do platinum plugs void a "stock" car status?
>What about type of oil, antifreeze, air pressure in tires(
>if one tire was 3lb low when you got it should you keep it
>that way)? What about window tint, air fresheners, or
>leather protectant sprays? What if your car has an adj
>suspension and it came with the switch in normal as opposed to
>performance, would it change the stock status to flip the
>switch? Do you have to maintain the correct level of gas to
>remain stock? Bottom line, any replaceables ie oil, spark
>plugs, air filter, tires can't void a stock car status other
>wise no cars would ever win a show in the stock categories other
>than a new car. Having said that, I've never seen a "stock"
>'90 LX run 13's. My not so stock '85 will do it though.
Blah Blah Blah.
We seem to have extremists everywhere. I understand that you posted this with
a note of sarcasm, but geez.... air fresheners? ..... flipping the suspension
switch? By the way, you better not refill your tank when you get low on gas.
You know.... because then you'll have non-stock gas. Geesh...... damn
extremists. Why don't you go hug a tree and stop wasting our time.
AR
'96 Mystic Cobra Coupe
#336 of 2000
P.S. If you were just kidding.... great! Because I laughed my ass off when I
first read this.
Marc Warden
Traction control not an option on the Cobra...
Sincerely,
MarcW.
Jamey Johnston
> >Actually thats not true although my DOHC revs to 6800 i dont
shift there
> >the motor starts to flatten out around 6200
> >1st -- 6500rpm
> >2nd -- 6200rpm
> >3rd -- 6000
Stan, I have a DOHC that definitely runs better times when
redlined every time. Depending on altitude and temp, maybe you
need a new set of spark plugs, or a lower gap on the ones you
have. I've heard of DOHC's losing power past 6K RPM,
especially after modifications such as forced induction, but
I've hard complaints without. You may want to check it out.
If you can get power to redline, you should improve your ET's.
TFrog93
In article <199806251856...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, nsi...@aol.com
(NSI Inc) writes:
>We seem to have extremists everywhere. I understand that you posted this
>with a note of sarcasm, but geez.... air fresheners? ..... flipping the
suspension
>switch? By the way, you better not refill your tank when you get low on gas.
>You know.... because then you'll have non-stock gas. Geesh...... damn
>extremists. Why don't you go hug a tree and stop wasting our time.
I sure hope that was a joke, too. If personal experience were the only judge,
I'd have to say that 1993 LX 5.0s run no better than 15.2 in the quarter,
stock. Of course, that was my first (only) run, and I'm sure I could do
better. After all, I'm modified now - I've replace the winter air in my tires
with lighter summer air. Should be good for 3/10s.....
dwight
Stan
The car only has 4k on it... what plugs do you use and what gap
NSI Inc
In article <199806260135...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, tfr...@aol.com
(TFrog93) writes:
>I sure hope that was a joke, too. If personal experience were the only
>judge,
>I'd have to say that 1993 LX 5.0s run no better than 15.2 in the quarter,
>stock. Of course, that was my first (only) run, and I'm sure I could do
>better. After all, I'm modified now - I've replace the winter air in my
>tires
>with lighter summer air. Should be good for 3/10s.....
>
>dwight
>
>
ROFL
Frank Mogaddedi
Somewhat recently, tfr...@aol.com (TFrog93) muttered:
> In article <199806240540...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> noopt...@aol.com (NoOption5L) writes:
>
>> Cobras typically run 99 - 101 trap speeds ('98s seem to be posting a bit
>>higher numbers / maybe Ford is playing around with the computer?) and
>
> (Hand rising sheepishly...)
>
Baaah. Err.. Me Too. But then, mine's 'just' a '94GTConv.
Frank
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Disclaimer: I represent | Don't dream your life, |
| only myself. If that much! | live your dreams! |
+----------------- http://www.NetUnlimited.net/~frank/ ---------------+
Jamey Johnston
> > Stan, I have a DOHC that definitely runs better times when
> > redlined every time. Depending on altitude and temp, maybe
you
> > need a new set of spark plugs, or a lower gap on the ones
you
> > have. I've heard of DOHC's losing power past 6K RPM,
> > especially after modifications such as forced induction,
but
> > I've hard complaints without. You may want to check it
out.
> > If you can get power to redline, you should improve your
ET's.
> The car only has 4k on it... what plugs do you use and what
gap
My plugs are factory, and I never had a problem at high RPM's.
I have heard from some people at Saleen that the problem was
primarily due to temp and or high altitude. There is more info
at NGKsparkplugs about proper gapping, it mainly talks about
4.6 with NOS or a Blower, but it mentions the high RPM problem
of the 4.6 with the EEC-V briefly about midway down the page
(use the link below). They recommend a low heat range plug
gapped at .039", or as low as .030"-.035" for NOS or Blown
applications. I hope this helps you out. If you can take your
engine all the way to redline for every shift, your ET's should
significantly improve!
http://www.ngksparkplugs.com/Pages/mustang.html
Psycho
Of course it won't make much diff, that was my point. Everyone
gets so uptight about "stock" vs modified. I don't think that
a timing change would disclaim a car to being stock and that can
give you a little and a K&N. I think everyone should improve
where they think their Stang is weak and givea flying F*** what
anyone else thinks. Later man.
Still somewhat blue '85 GT E303 cam, dual plane hi rise,
4bbl mech sec carb, exhaust
mods, needing heads and $$$$.
NOT "stock" by a smidgeon.
Psycho
Of course I was being ridiculous to make a point. All these
together would gain you little, but I've heard people give
others shit about being "stock". I personally think you should
upgrade the weak areas of Stangs and not bother to worry about
what the losing cars driver says.
P.S. I actually saw a Mystic for the first time the other
night. Wow, that it some neat shit. I saw a golden cobra and
went to check it out and it was green, oops I mean black, oops
ect.....
Stan
I'll try it the next time im at the track and let yopunow
Psycho
Of course it was a joke showing the extremes which people take
this stuff. I personally think every Stang has room for some
improvements. If there is a mod which can make my car faster,
safer, look better, whatever, and I don't do it because of
wanting to keep it stock,there needs to be cause. It really
all depends on what the cars life is gonna be. Showcar? Leave
it stock. Everyday driver, do what you think is best for your
driving habits. The reason I posted was that I thought it
ridiculous that a timing adj would be cause for "non stock"
status of a car. I just expanded on that theme.
_______ __
Mustangs Rule!! _______ __
NoOption5L
In article <35911A...@LESS.NET>, UF1 <SP...@LESS.NET> writes:
>NoOption5L wrote:
>>
>SNIP
>>
>> >I have raced
>> >my '97 Cobra against many 5.0Ls and have never lost or had a race even
>> >come close.
>>
>> >"never lost or had a race even come close."
>>
>> What's wrong with those 5 liters that your racing?
>
>Absolutely nothing. Most run high 14s, low 15s stock. Most
>Cobras run high 13s stock.
Automatic 5 liters run those numbers. A well driven, well tuned 5 liter should
run very low 14's and with stickier *street* tires high 13's.
>> Cobras typically run
>> 99 - 101 trap speeds ('98s seem to be posting a bit higher numbers / maybe
>> Ford is playing around with the computer?) and 5 liters should run similiar
>> numbers with very slight mods (is there any 5 liters left without a few
>> tweaks?).
>A FULL SECOND in a 1/4 mile race is
>a significant loss. They may be going the same speed at
>that distance but I already have a FULL SECOND to go even
>faster and farther.
A FULL second, no way. My slowest run at sea level was a 14.5. I missed
3rd gear. My best was a 14.2 unpower shifted, and this was my *first* time
I ever raced at a drag slip. I found out later I even had the wrong spark
plugs installed.
>> So, for NO 5 liters to win or even come close?......
>Let me be VERY clear on this point..."I" have never had
>one even come close.
You need to find someone who can drive a 5 liter.
>There will come a day when I run
>across one with enough mods
Enough mods = timing (free) air box (free) and a decent set of tires.
>to hand me my hat but it
>hasn't happened yet. Unlike some, when this day does
>happen, I won't feel the need to go out and buy more go
>fast goodies.
You say that now.
>Racing isn't the primary purpose for my
>purchase of this vehicle. It is a daily driver that
>has a benefit of being damned fast.
Mine started its life as our sole family car (wife and two kids). Stayed that
way for 8 years.
>Creating a monster
>that becomes less streetable for daily use doesn't interest
>me.
Fine tuning and freeing up HP to get every little bit out of my stock
package interests me. I haven't lost a bit of my streetability.
>> I recently had a Cobra owner tell me, "I thought I could be any 5 liter
>> car." This was after I beat him by 2 tenths.
>To think a Cobra could beat any 5.0L is a foolish idea. I
>can beat unmodified Mustangs (fair comparison since mine is
>completely stock right down to the air silencer).
Your right, pure stock vs pure stock a Cobra is faster. But a "tuned" 5
liter will not allow a Cobra driver to make any driving mistakes.
>Hand your
>buddy any Mustang rag and show him a 5.0L with the front
>wheels in the air! While these type of vehicles are an awesome
>sight at the track, I have NEVER seen one on the street.
VERY streetable, near stock, 5 liters can run low 13's high 12's.
<snip>
>> But, I'm not going
>> to give him a rematch! Something about a Vortech S/C he *now* has
>> under his hood....
>Hey, he adds 1 single mod and now you don't want to race?
=-)
>He was
>fair enough to race against your modified Stang. Hee hee!
Yes, I have a few bolt ons. But the motor is stock...at least until I bolt
on my roller rockers...will be using the stock 1.6 ratio though.
>> What numbers has your Cobra posted at the track?
>I haven't taken the Cobra to the track yet. Temps are too high
>to even consider going.
You gotta go. You might run into a well driven 5 liter.
>I'm really more into the impromptu light to light street race anyway.
My buddies 5 liter used to kick my butt every time on the street. When we
took them both to the strip it was a completely different story. Look for
different outcomes....
Sorry for the long delay in replying to your post. To much to do in the
summer time...