2.2L vs 5.0L question

[1shift]

I have a 1988 Chrysler LeBaron GTS 4 door, T1 intercooled mitisi turbo, that is stock except the intercooler, it also has a 5 speed trans, that I have ran against 2 mustang's, I have beaten both of them by (the first one was a GT) a car length, and the second one (not sure what engine was in that car but it was a 2000 m.y.) just flat out gave up running, or should I say trying to even keep up. So tell your friend to put up or shut up!

[Reaper1]

My '90 Daytona was a VERY consistant car. Every time I took it to the track it would be within 1-2 10ths of a second each run(unless I screwed up the launch or the engine was hotter than I normally would run it). I ran it both with a 1/4 tank, and with almost a full tank(gage still on "F"). The difference was "around" 1 10th of a second...so instead of running the 16.0-16.1 or occasional 15.9, it would run 16.2 or so. When I did finally break the 15.9 barrier I took out the rear seat and iced the intake for a half an hour. I also was running about 1/3 tank of fuel, and had removed the spare and associated hardware. The car would run 16.0XX ALL DAY with the spare and all removed and I started out with around 1/2 tank of fuel. It took taking the rear seat out to bust that last little bit.

The car put down 130hp at the wheels...estimated weight was around 2700#'s(base model with V6/A604)

I realize that every little bit helps, but my point was that unless you are going to do ALL of the little bits, then the one thing just doesn't seem to make sense(at least to me). BTW, that car also had a tendancy to have fuel starvation issues at fuel levels starting about 1/4 tank. I did have it happen once on a hard launch....the car bucked all the way down the track...I STILL beat the van I was racing! LOL

[bhazard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxljrfan ha ha a stock 2.2 will beat a 5.0. i say you'd win bye 2 car lengths. are you going from a digg or a roll?

I highly doubt that. Maybe a T2 with a good driver.

Quote:

Originally Posted by venom800tt 80s Mustangs are crap, i used to have 87 lx (my first stick shift) thank god i learned manual with that not my Daytona. They're heavy and junk but mine was 2.3l not 5.0

A 2.3 mustang is an economy car at best. A rwd escort.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATaylorRacing The 1989 5.0 Mustangs had 225-235 hp and weighed in at 3350 lbs. Here are some 0-60 times and 1/4 mile time from various new Fords of around that time:

A 5.0 GT vert weighed 3333lbs in 89. 5.0 notches were about 3050lbs. Hatchbacks are about 50 lbs more and GT's are another 100lbs or so. A base LX notch is about 2750lbs.

[Powell]

I remember hearing that a 5.0 stang was technically a hair faster but if you really knew how to shift and launch, a stock 2.2 COULD beat it (may be other factors with weather and what not though). So i would think yah, learn how to drive it better and with your mods you should be able to take him pretty easily.

[Powell]

Doh i really need to check the dates before i post

[GLHNSLHT2]

please, if you have Any mods at all to a TD and can't beat an 89 mustang that's stock you need to go home and sell the car. My Auto 2.2 new yorker roasted a 98 4.6 GT 5spd with nothing but a T2 conversion, cat delete and 14psi on the computer! I was still running the factory crimped section over the rear axle and the stock muffler. And when I say roasted I'm talking 8-10 car lengths by the endo of the track. It was sad and he was PISSED. Wouldn't race me almost the rest of the night till his buddy told him that he had kept up with me almost (BS I played with that guy all the way down the track and just let him be somewhat close). So I made it a closer race the 2nd time around but it was still a joke. I let him leave 1st then part throttled it all the way down the track and still beat him by 2 cars.

[chilort]

Quote:

Originally Posted by InfinityShelbyZ I say a more fun idea is someone actually try this on a real timed run. Thatd be more fun!

Someone needs to submit this to Mythbusters!

[Torrle101]

Not to go off subject here but what do you think would happen if he raced a first generation or second generation SHO bone stock Manual or auto, just curious.

[turbokid]

Wow... I have a buddy with a 99 sho automatic and that car is no dog!
Sure its not REALLY FAST but its a quick car for being a heavy taurus

[Reaper1]

Well, considering that the first gen SHO's were comparable to stock Spirit R/T's(the R/T being slightly quicker), I've got to give the nod to the SHO. Now if it's an atuo...then he's got a chance, and if it's the V8 he DEFINATLY has a chance. Those things were not fast. They did sound cool though!

A friend of mine used to have an SHO...that was one fun car! I loved revving the p*ss out of it! Thing was kinda scary to drive though as it would change its mind every few seconds as to which wheel had more traction. The shifter was absolutly HORRID in it too! I can't see how the magazines back in the day could even complain about the R/T's shifter!? You almost need a person in the back seat of the SHO so you can have them pull the shifter in to 2nd and 4th!

[ljbprrfmof]

So what is the story? Has NoImports raced the Mustang? What are the results? Is he practicing his launches?

I need an update or something here. LOL

[gkcooper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torrle101 Not to go off subject here but what do you think would happen if he raced a first generation or second generation SHO bone stock Manual or auto, just curious.

I had a bone stock '88 ShelbyZ TII, and I would blow my friends, then new SHO, off the road completely. Not even close.

We traded cars once and he blew me away in my car. I remember the sound of that 24V Yamaha engine though, sweet!

[Timmay2]

Why dont you guys just face each other and drop your pants and get the penis war over with?

Save money on gas, thats for sure.

[Oclk Dlux]

^^

[Reaper1]

Either the new(figuring '89 sinc you dind't specify the year...) SHO was a complete dog or your Shelby Z was a bit stronger than average, or the SHO was an auto car. In manual tranny form those cars were low 15 second cars. In auto form they were low 16 second cars. I know that my '88 Shelby Z went 15.6@89 or so when I took it to the track on its best run(it MAY have had a slightly faster run in it with a better 60' time). Based on that I'd say that the race between a stock Shelby Z and a stock '89 SHO(manual tranny...I think they only came that way that year, but I could be wrong) should be fairly close, and given that the SHO has more power should also top out higher too.

As for a stock Shelby Z beating an older 5.0...it really should depend on the drivers. If the Mudstain owner knows how to drive(given it's a manual car), then it may not come out so well for the Daytona. However, if the 5-oh is an auto...there is no race....the Daytona will spank that arse all day!