You would still get your ass handed to you. My red SVO ran 15.44 @ ~93 ish with a K&N. Toss a little more boost and some exhaust at them and you've got high 14's.
< Message edited by TRBOPWR -- 1/31/2008 7:35:25 AM >
_____________________________
1985 SVO 13.62 @ ~97mph with 20 psi, on the brakes trying to keep from breaking out!
quote:
drhoward You don't count with your wierdo turbo special olympic mustangs[/q
Because a brand new GT Mustang was ~$7-8K less money. Plus, look at the mindset of people today, let alone then. The EVO or STi are perfect examples. People generally agree, yes, they are pretty quick little cars. But, gasp!, they are only 4 bangers. Why spend 35K on a new STi or EVO when you can get a perfectly good Mustang GT with a V8 for less than 30K? The SVO was ahead of its time.
You can also add to that people probably weren't super anxious to void warranties and such with modifications to their brand new cars...
(Just to add, I meant high 14's before not 13's. High 13's generally require more boost, some timing, maybe some light porting, and stickier tires.)
_____________________________
1985 SVO 13.62 @ ~97mph with 20 psi, on the brakes trying to keep from breaking out!
quote:
drhoward You don't count with your wierdo turbo special olympic mustangs[/q
id love to have some parts of a junk one. 3.8 are total dogs plus the cougar is a pig. weight to horsepower ratio is everything. so how can you argue a car that weighs less with more horsepower is slower than you?? the only fast 3.8 i've ever rode in was the supercoupe we had in the early 90s.
Pat & Amandas Wedding Fund Contributor Posts: 2913
Joined: 7/21/2003 From: United States Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: SKAR
quote:
ORIGINAL: 92lxsleeper whatever i'll make a video if u don't believe me.... how do i know i was doing 130? the needle went past 120, locked on the bezel and my rpms kept goin. hellion... u have a 88 hp mustang... no offense but the svos arent i hvery fast... my 3.8 isn't either.. but its faster than the 5.0 thunderbird.. ad a mark vii... i know what they do. i've had 5.0 mustangs, mark vii's, 2.3, and a 351 bronco so far my 3.8 is my fav (stock) my all time fav was my 347 stroker.
youve owned and had all of those on the road? arent you 19?
what's wrong with being young... I built my first twin turbo kit right before i turned 17 . I didn't know wtf i was doing at the time. My dad helped teach me how to weld while I was 16 on a couple bars of steel... I bought the piping & had to have a bit of help from companies, but I pulled it off... That was eons ago... If I could see myself then i probably wouldn't stop laughing. especially at my first cold air intake setup LOL. at least i started young.
quote:
ORIGINAL: 92lxsleeper whatever i'll make a video if u don't believe me.... how do i know i was doing 130? the needle went past 120, locked on the bezel and my rpms kept goin. hellion... u have a 88 hp mustang... no offense but the svos arent very fast... my 3.8 isn't either.. but its faster than the 5.0 thunderbird.. i had a mark vii... i know what they do. i've had 5.0 mustangs, mark vii's, 2.3, and a 351 bronco so far my 3.8 is my fav (stock) my all time fav was my 347 stroker.
Not saying your wrong because for all I know you could have bought your car & someone put alot of money into it but you aren't aware. But saying the svo isn't very fast is not all right. I built a 2.3t notch just to show how quick they were to a friend that didn't believe you could have cheap power. & one of my good friends bought an 85 1/2 svo shortly after. With the exhaust off after the down pipe (clogged cat so took it off) & set on premium his car is quicker than my friends '88 GT with only a catback. Both cars with a T5. & I know my friend that owns the '88 GT can shift alot faster than my friend with the svo.
I've done quite a few 5.0 swaps & been working on them for quite a while. Needless to say I know my way around them & love them just as much as the next mustang owner, but the 2.3t stock for stock will run right with it. Now I personally prefer my 5.0 to the 2.3t, but I also have a bit more work done to my 5.0 than the 2.3t. Both are great engines & both sound lovely while driving (i prefer the 5.0 though while just cruising though). 2.3t's can be made fast for very cheap just like the 5.0
_____________________________
If you have to ask what it takes to get to 500 HP, you don''t have what it takes to get there.
''89 Mustang GT ''86 Mustang vert ''84 Mustang notch turbocharged ''96 Mustan
Posts: 2169
Joined: 7/1/2007 From: Lincoln, Rhode Island Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: FoxGT
quote:
ORIGINAL: SKAR
quote:
ORIGINAL: 92lxsleeper whatever i'll make a video if u don't believe me.... how do i know i was doing 130? the needle went past 120, locked on the bezel and my rpms kept goin. hellion... u have a 88 hp mustang... no offense but the svos arent i hvery fast... my 3.8 isn't either.. but its faster than the 5.0 thunderbird.. ad a mark vii... i know what they do. i've had 5.0 mustangs, mark vii's, 2.3, and a 351 bronco so far my 3.8 is my fav (stock) my all time fav was my 347 stroker.
youve owned and had all of those on the road? arent you 19?
what's wrong with being young... I built my first twin turbo kit right before i turned 17 . I didn't know wtf i was doing at the time. My dad helped teach me how to weld while I was 16 on a couple bars of steel... I bought the piping & had to have a bit of help from companies, but I pulled it off... That was eons ago... If I could see myself then i probably wouldn't stop laughing. especially at my first cold air intake setup LOL. at least i started young.
quote:
ORIGINAL: 92lxsleeper whatever i'll make a video if u don't believe me.... how do i know i was doing 130? the needle went past 120, locked on the bezel and my rpms kept goin. hellion... u have a 88 hp mustang... no offense but the svos arent very fast... my 3.8 isn't either.. but its faster than the 5.0 thunderbird.. i had a mark vii... i know what they do. i've had 5.0 mustangs, mark vii's, 2.3, and a 351 bronco so far my 3.8 is my fav (stock) my all time fav was my 347 stroker.
Not saying your wrong because for all I know you could have bought your car & someone put alot of money into it but you aren't aware. But saying the svo isn't very fast is not all right. I built a 2.3t notch just to show how quick they were to a friend that didn't believe you could have cheap power. & one of my good friends bought an 85 1/2 svo shortly after. With the exhaust off after the down pipe (clogged cat so took it off) & set on premium his car is quicker than my friends '88 GT with only a catback. Both cars with a T5. & I know my friend that owns the '88 GT can shift alot faster than my friend with the svo.
I've done quite a few 5.0 swaps & been working on them for quite a while. Needless to say I know my way around them & love them just as much as the next mustang owner, but the 2.3t stock for stock will run right with it. Now I personally prefer my 5.0 to the 2.3t, but I also have a bit more work done to my 5.0 than the 2.3t. Both are great engines & both sound lovely while driving (i prefer the 5.0 though while just cruising though). 2.3t's can be made fast for very cheap just like the 5.0
wow... this is an old thread.
but no. the 2.3T.. hell even the 5.0L... there not fast... they are very good for being stock, and for the price they are. both easily upgradable.
_____________________________
I''''''''''''''''ll kick your sorry arses so hard you''''''''''''''''ll kiss the moons.
1995 Ford Explorer Sport 8.8" rear end 4.11 gears posi 4.0L OHV 5 Speed Manual 4X4 Cherrybomb Glasspack 17 mpg
Pat & Amandas Wedding Fund Contributor Posts: 2913
Joined: 7/21/2003 From: United States Status: offline
I guess I should have worded that a little different... I was comparing it to most stock cars of that time. I don't consider the 2.3t or 5.0 fast either stock. heck my '89 gt runs 12's on street tires & i still only consider it "decent" when people ask if it's fast.
I was just trying to get across that the 5.0 isn't like all bad compared to the 2.3t. If both were in a race 87-93 5.0 compared to an svo on premium & both had just rolled off the assembly line I wouldn't say one would trash the other. One does have less power yes, but it weighs less so it makes up for it in power to weight ratio.
Yeah it is old... I didn't notice the date. I just saw it in the 1st page on 4 cylinder section.
< Message edited by FoxGT -- 5/15/2008 11:19:58 PM >
_____________________________
If you have to ask what it takes to get to 500 HP, you don''t have what it takes to get there.
''89 Mustang GT ''86 Mustang vert ''84 Mustang notch turbocharged ''96 Mustan
sorry, but isnt this a "ford mustang" site? if you want to come on this site and bad mouth everyones stuff, than go to a all so popular "chevy celebrity" site.
Printable Version
RE: raced a svo this morning - 
;
so far my 3.8 is my fav (stock) my all time fav was my 347 stroker. 
. I didn't know wtf i was doing at the time. My dad helped teach me how to weld while I was 16 on a couple bars of steel... I bought the piping & had to have a bit of help from companies, but I pulled it off... 
That was eons ago... If I could see myself then i probably wouldn't stop laughing. 
