Posts: 5
Joined: 5/14/2003 From: United States Status: offline
The 94's and 95's are the worst of the V6's. The autos run low 17's and the manuals run about mid 16's. Before I got my 99 GT 5-speed, I had an 1994 auto V6. I had about 20hp worth of mods and raced an unmodded 01 5-speed V6 and absolutely got killed. I never raced an 99+ V6 Auto so I can't tell you how I would have faired. Just remember the difference between a pre 99 and a 99+ is night and day. Unless the pre99 owner has serious mods, he is going to be seeing some taillights:)
Posts: 15
Joined: 5/16/2003 From: United States Status: offline
Ah...honest numbers. Refreshing Too bad I didn't see that in the thread that I started. (1985 issues). I startred with an attitude (sorry) but didn't mean to offend.
Mustangs rock! The next gen is going to drop jaws if it is like the show car that they have shown in mags. :cheers:
Posts: 2033
Joined: 5/22/2003 From: Newport News, Va Status: offline
them 3.8 V6 engines put out 140-150 at the flywheel depending on year. Mr Tweak yours is 150 stock. to the wheels? maybe 120. a 98 GT puts 181 to the wheels. compared to a camaro you ask? LT-1's put about 235 to the wheels, and the LS-1's dyno about 290.
Posts: 224
Joined: 6/8/2003 From: United States Status: offline
the v6 has potential though.... ive got 330 hp and 345 tq on a 98 3.8 v6. i have my mods listed in my sig., and i run 12.7- 12.8 on a good day. it tops out around 144 mph. but, if i sank that money into a cobra, id probably have about 500 hp.....
Printable Version
V6 Questions - 
