Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Proof for haters

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: MrWilson

I got a dude thats talking trash about 4.6 dohc's especially the mark's. He keeps talking about how 5.0 fox's will walk the 4.6 even in stock trim, and how there is no potential with the dohc, and with a head swap only a 5.0 can make 450+hp...and that a 4.6 couldnt even think of that kinda power without a blower or nos or w/e, Just want some solid proof to put this hater in his place. I know its laughable, but just humor me.

Posted by: scott9050

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWilson

I got a dude thats talking trash about 4.6 dohc's especially the mark's. He keeps talking about how 5.0 fox's will walk the 4.6 even in stock trim, and how there is no potential with the dohc, and with a head swap only a 5.0 can make 450+hp...and that a 4.6 couldnt even think of that kinda power without a blower or nos or w/e, Just want some solid proof to put this hater in his place. I know its laughable, but just humor me.

It's hard to make an honest 400 hp with a 5.0 with no power adder, let alone 450. With just a head swap it will be lucky to make an extra 20 hp to the wheels, there are just too many restrictions in front of it assuming EFI like a poor flowing stock manifold, small MAF with a restrictive screen and sample tube, small TB etc. Stock versus stock the 4.6 will walk all over it (assuming a Cobra) and my times this weekend were right in line with a decent running 5spd Fox. If he wants to argue that a head swap will gain him that kind of power, send him here and we will set him straight.
I owned a fully built Fox body 5.0 for 8 years and built the car from the ground up, I know what they are and aren't capable of.

Posted by: Dern Humpus

Ive heard of 5.0s with heads, cam, and gear going 11s on slicks. I have seen stock 5.0's run anywhere from mid 15s to mid 14s with a 5spd.

But for the most part he is full of

Posted by: JC1994

He's full of sh!t, I've got a ton of mods on my 5.0 to get just 285 HP. considering the fact that the 4.6 is putting out 280 STOCK!!! I'm also running a 4 barrel and not EFI on my 5.0 after disapointment with 5.0 EFI.

Posted by: rmac694203

My manager has an 83 GT and always talks about wanting to race. But I usually chicken out due to the fact that my Mark is pretty slow. Damn transmission.

Posted by: JC1994

I've got a 95 full roller motor with Motorsport cam and aluminum heads in my 83.

Posted by: rmac694203

I dont know what exactly he has. I know he said he got a new intake, carb., whole ignition system, headers w/ H pipe and flows, and some other things I can't think of at this moment.

Posted by: Stack

That guy is a putz and you shouldn't waste your electrons with that oxygen theif...

Tell him to go take a long walk off a short bridge!

Posted by: brentalan

All I know is that in 1989 the Stock Taurus SHO smoked the Mustang GT with the 5.0. Sure they are great for modifications but stock for stock these 5.0's are pretty weak from the late 80's/early '90s

Posted by: JoshMcMadMac

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentalan

All I know is that in 1989 the Stock Taurus SHO smoked the Mustang GT with the 5.0...

I would like to see where you got that from. The SHO is definately powerful for what it is, but it is still a 15 second machine in stock trim, even if it is low 15's. The Mustang GT should be no more than high 14's.

Posted by: ImportEater

a stock junkyard 5.0 with jegs/kaase heads, a .500 lift cam and a carb made 500hp

Posted by: ShizNight

my buddy with his trick flow twisted wedge heads, stage one cam, 4.10 gears, 33 spline axles, spool, slicks, switch to carb, exuaghst(duh lol) cut a 12.20 as a best from a 14.33 when he was stock with exuaghst. we're guessing maybe 340-350whp....if you could squeeze 450+hp from a head swap let me know...i'll buy those heads in a heart beat lol.

Posted by: Calabrio

Take him to the track and race a stock 5.0
problem solved.

video tape it.

Posted by: JC1994

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentalan

All I know is that in 1989 the Stock Taurus SHO smoked the Mustang GT with the 5.0. Sure they are great for modifications but stock for stock these 5.0's are pretty weak from the late 80's/early '90s

215-225HP stock. depending on the year. 86 was only 200 HP.

Posted by: MrWilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by JC1994

215-225HP stock. depending on the year. 86 was only 200 HP.

jeez, it almost makes me cry to think how underpowered 70's-80's cars were! Just to think that the pontiac 400 only made 200hp! thats rediclous!

Posted by: JC1994

83-84 5.0 were 175HP non-roller cam. 85 225HP, first year of the roller cam.
86 was the first year for EFI, only 200HP, from then on about 215HP stock.

Posted by: brentalan

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshMcMadMac

OK, I guess you are right I could have sworn I read somewhere that it was. I did find this:

http://www.shotimes.com/php-bin/modu...thold=0&sid=28

http://www.mustangregistry.org/lx_87_89.htm

Where they are saying the late 80's Mustang GT was running 15.3 as compared to a 15.2 for the SHO.

Other places I've looked put the late 80's Mustang in the high-14's but still - The SHO is damn respectible in comparison to the Mustang from the same time period. My real point, in response to Mr. Wilson, is that whether it's high 14's or low 15's, it's not that fast for what it was in stock trim. Sorry for the exxageration in the previous post.

Posted by: JC1994

back when my Mustang had stock 95 engine, heads, and cam with a 373 gear I beat every sho around BIG time. no bottle either.

Posted by: scott9050

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentalan

5.0 LX's have run as fast as low 14's at 98+ stock. There are too many variables and each year 5.0 can be up to 2 seconds difference stock (example: 2.73 geared AOD GT convertible versus low option 3.08 geared 5spd LX notch).

Posted by: JC1994

or you could opt for a 327 rear gear like my 1986 Capri 5.0 had.

Posted by: JoshMcMadMac

Quote:

Originally Posted by brentalan

Thanks for the links. The SHO is definately a strong runner. As for a GT running a 15.3, Scott9050 hit that on the head. Options make all of the difference on that front, so I could see a GT 'vert auto with all the options and a poor rearend cutting a best at low 15's, but personally I don't think that is a fair comparison to a 1989 SHO that is a 5-speed and a hard top.

Posted by: MrWilson

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshMcMadMac

That reminds me, when i was runnin last friday, 3 of the runs i had were against an 89 sho. We were givin eachother a pritty good run, he ran 15.1's consistantly, till he broke. I thought the sho was a mid 15 sec car myself, but they are pritty peppy. sad thing is, i ran my 14 when he broke, so i couldnt shove his face in it. ( he was talking trash about my car runnin 15.3 to his 15.1)

Posted by: Lincolns Own

say nananana my car is together and ur's isnt

my dad used to own a '93 SHO taurus. ford didnt have a manual shifter to handle that motor and horsepower, *has some upgrades, dont remember what* and so someone had put a mitsubishi truck shifter in it. he hated that shifter. he called it a "box-o-rox" shifter cuz it was so hard to shift. for some stupid reason, u had to shift from 1st gear, up to 4th, then back to 2nd, then 3rd, then 4th again. it was f**king weird. but once it got going, she purred nice