I had a friend race (for EXIDE) a FWD charger body, 440 RB wedge under hood.
RWD of course... Havn't followed up to see whats happened with him lately.
We had a VP Superfuels at the time. Real lead was the shiznit.
My own 440 and 383 have all been lead sleds, far too heavy to consider racing.
But that didn't stop me from porting the heads, foolin with cam timing, etc. etc..
Changed the points to Mallory optical too, if I recall.
RWD of course... Havn't followed up to see whats happened with him lately.
We had a VP Superfuels at the time. Real lead was the shiznit.
My own 440 and 383 have all been lead sleds, far too heavy to consider racing.
But that didn't stop me from porting the heads, foolin with cam timing, etc. etc..
Changed the points to Mallory optical too, if I recall.
I am really showing my age -- we had a 300 with the 440-TNT Package -- guess the year.
My wife made me give up my GT Mustang after I had crashed it (twice) so I got an MB560SEL to replace it! That was 22 years ago. The MB wasn't great from 0 to 60, but from 60 to 100+ it was amazing.
How many folks out there watch "Top Gear"?
It is not too hard to outperform Mustang GT guys; I did that always driving Sentra SE with a manual gearshift. However, later I discovered why, trying Mustang GT myself: it thinks too looong before reacting. I do not understand what for are all that horse powers if the car does not accelerate as fast as asked to.
However, the explanation may be simple: the same plant builds both Mustangs and Crown Victorias, so the owners of the formers thinks cars are fast, while the drivers of the later's actually have faster cars.
Our '97 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP is 1/10th of a second faster than a '97 Mustang GT,a Supercharged 3.8L-V6 Vs. NA 5.0L-V8. Boost is good.
The V6 Mustangs had a NA 3.8,but the NA 3.8 in the Grand Prix GT (non supercharged) still makes more power.
Who Doesn't?
I was racing my 4 cylinder turbo car in the late 80's. I built it in 1985 and tweaked it over a 5 year period. It was an 82 Charger with the motor and trans out of a turbo Daytona. The Mustang GT of the time was rated at 230 HP and with a good driver a mildly modified 5 speed car would run about 14.0 seconds in the 1/4 mile at a dragstrip. Yes the magazines were quoting faster times, but this is South Florida with heat, humidity, and poor traction conditions at the local strip (now a parking lot for a freakin mall). The Mustang GT weighed in at about 3500 pounds, the Mustang LX with the 5.0 engine was faster because it weighed 3000 pounds. The big Fords weren't even close to competitive. I used to be at the strip at least twice a month (often more) and I can assure you that the Mustang LX 5.0 was the fastest new car available at the time in stock or mildly modified form. That track closed down in the early 1990's and I quit racing. The closest track is now 74 miles away.
My Dodge weighed in at 2450 pounds with me in it ( I weighed about 50 pounds less than I do now). My engine was making about 220 HP at 7200 RPM. With the exhaust removed at the downpipe I could bang out some 13.5 second quarters if I could launch the FWD without wheelhop and hit the 1-2 shift without touching the rev limiter. Mustang GT drivers were truly surprized but I had a 50-50 shot with the LX cars. Of course thare were some really fast stuff out there, but the Mustangs were the most popular. The import crowd didn't exist then, and vintage muscle was still fairly common.
I once owned a 1968 Fury III with a 440. Definitely a land barge but it was a nice driver. Not slow, but far too heavy for action.
I remember sitting in the staging lanes at Miami Hollywood speedway. The usual action was for the Mustang guys (50% of the cars) to have their hoods open, drivers talking smack and thumping their chests, while I would have a bag of ice on my intercooler. There was an elderly hispanic gentleman in the lane next to me in a 4 door MB, sitting in his car with the stereo and AC on. We staged, me making a racket without the exhaust. He didn't seem to even notice. The lights came down, and the Mercedes was gone, no noise, no tire smoke, just gone. It went like 12.8 or something, I said WTF?
I recently sold my 3.8L 1999 Mustang. The 3.8 is an old school design based on the 5.0 with 2 cylinders removed. Mine had aluminum heads and shorty headers from the factory. Not a fast car, but the acceleration limit was traction since it would spin the right rear any time it was floored.
If you were to graph HP (or more importantly torque) of automotobile engines VS time it becomes obvious that things have improved exponentially in the past 5 years. This coincides with the ability to accurately model airflow and combustion. I think the best new Detroit iron has to be the GM 3.6L 6 cylinder found in some Cadillacs, some SUV's and the new Camaro. 304 HP from 3.6L. Unheard of just a few years ago. My buddie's 5.7L GTO only makes 300.
Yep, I have been a gearhead for about as long as I have been a tubehead. I can't exactly remember which I did first (the guitar amp?), make a guitar amp out of an old Magnavox hifi, or slap a chain saw engine on a junk go-kart and smoke the neighborhood rich kid in his $600 (60's money) store bought go-kart.
My car definitely gets different mileage depending on which brand of petrol I put in it. I only use 98 Octane, will run on 95 but not very well, has a knock sensor and retards the ignition severly when running on the specified minimum 95 killing the responsiveness. Mobil (exon) or Shell seem to be fine. BP I can't tell any difference with performance but gets about 20-30KM less on a tank in city driving, caltex I stopped using after a tank that smelt more like toluene than petrol and the car ran like a dog.
I used to use 104+ before 98 octane fuel was available, only used it on trips, but the improvement in responsiveness (due to improved torque I suspect) was very noticable. It did have the effect of leaving a reddish brown deposit on the spark plugs.
Tony.
I used to use 104+ before 98 octane fuel was available, only used it on trips, but the improvement in responsiveness (due to improved torque I suspect) was very noticable. It did have the effect of leaving a reddish brown deposit on the spark plugs.
Tony.
Ah no, there were stock Mustang GT cars that I outperformed using my 5-speed Nissan Sentra SE back in 2001. I used to switch from the 2'nd gear to the 4'th one, it was the trick. It had 145 HP only, but was very light and responsive. It had 2.0 L SR20DE I4 engine, and weighted about 2,500 lb. Assembled in Mexico, mostly from Japanese parts.
Last edited:
While I don't dispute your statement, it is based on 2001 data. My experiences date from 1985 to 1991. I can state that the 5.0 liter Mustangs of the day would beat any Nissan Sentra available at the time unless the Sentra was an extremely modified car. Import "tuning" was not yet popular in the late 80's.
It is a well known fact that the Mustangs with the 5.0 liter engine were considerably faster than the 4.6 liter version that appeared in 1996. One of the "Stang Bangers" that used to hang out across the street had plenty of 10 second time slips in his early 90's Mustang with a worked over nitrous fed 5.0.
According to dragtimes.com a "stock" 2001 to 2004 Sentra SE with an SR20DE and a 5 speed ran 15.95, and those with minor modifications (intake and exhaust) ranged from 15.00 to 14.40. They report that "stock" Mustangs (4.6L) of the same year ranges ran 14.284 to 13.901. You do have to fax in your time slip for it to be valid but I am sure there is some "misrepresentation" as to the modifications made to "stock" vehicles.
I also find it unusual that you report faster acceleration by skipping 3rd gear. With my car I got the best times by hitting every gear and running it to 7200 RPM. Yes, the power may drop off above the peak torque point, but shifting too early, or skipping a gear entirely brings you into the next gear too far below the engines power band. This would likely be the case with any twin cam small 4 cylinder engine since their low speed torque isn't that great. I spent a great deal of time experimenting with transaxle final drive ratios and tire sizes to be at the top of (just touching the rev limiter) 4th gear as I went through the traps (timing lights at the end of the track).
my 1099cc car engine, complete with exhaust and inlet manifold and start motor and carburettors and gearbox and differential and output shafts and ready to run weighed in at <220lbs.
How can a 2000cc engine weigh 2500lbs?
Does your engine run itself, without body, transmission, wheels, brakes, etc...?
I know. Sentra SE was made later, in response to restrictions to import Nissan Skyline to USA. It was considered as a dangerous car on American roads. And Mustangs used manual gearshifts then, as well.
They took an ordinary Sentra body, changed engine, suspension, wheels, brakes, added stabilizing bars. Later they changed an engine making even faster Sentra SE-R Spec V. Now I know they import Skyline, but it is a totally different car. All Nissan cars I tried respond on gas pedal immediately, like BMW do. This response time when shifting gears is sometimes vital. Mustang that I tried had an automatic gearshift, and was thinking toooo sloooow before responding on a gas pedal. Probably, Mustang today is no more than a great legend.
Yes, I switched right before a redline, and time on shifting 2 times did not worth that short run I could get on the 3'rd gear; probably ratio between 2 and 4 was not so big like in your cars. I've found that experimentally.
Last edited:
Nissan Skyline 1985
Sentra of that period of time:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Sentra of that period of time:
And I suppose a police interceptor has to be faster than Mustangs young people are driving.
And it isn't it nice to know every time you visit a restroom just about anywhere in the USA that the stuff they spray into the air to mask the odor contains a healthy dose of toluene? Seriously grab one of those empties when they go in trash. I admit I was more than a little surprised...
And it isn't it nice to know every time you visit a restroom just about anywhere in the USA that the stuff they spray into the air to mask the odor contains a healthy dose of toluene? Seriously grab one of those empties when they go in trash. I admit I was more than a little surprised...
What kind of restrooms you been visitin' ? Next time you get off the seat light a match! (Cigarettes were not invented by the English to subjugate the native species of N. America, they were invented to clear bathroom odors.)
An absolute classic. I have watched it far too many times. My wife doesn't understand how I can still laugh at the mall scene or the flying Pinto. That's OK, I have no idea how she can watch Dancing with the Stars even once.
The Sentra SE was available in 2001 but not in 1985, The SE-R came a bit later, and like you say the SE-R Spec V was (and still is) the hot ticket. I have taken a ride in one, and it is a scary thing in the hands of an inexperienced driver. Nissan did not bring the Skyline to the US because it was right hand drive, and it did not pass safety or emission regulations. There are still quite a few of them here. I have seen one at the autocross races several years ago. It was not street legal (no registration).
You likely got into a 2005 or later model that uses "drive by wire". The gas pedal connects to the ECU computer. You floor the pedal, sending a request to the computer for some tire fire. The request gets vetoed by the legal department who has determined that tire fire is not politically correct, so you get a slow response. Revving the engine and dropping it in drive (hey it was a rental car) doesn't work either, the computer again vetoes your request. Same problem with the manual trans cars, the engine won't rev over 3000 RPM with the clutch pedal down.
The solution, you get a "Hypertech Power Programmer" (or one of several others) that reflashes the ECU to veto the legal department, and tire fire is instantly available!
No, the Police Interceptor is too heavy to be fast. It does have many reliability upgrades and a fairly stout 4.6L engine, but they aren't fast. Ford never officially sold new Police cars to the general public although a few dealers sold them through their fleet sales departments. In an attempt to score some enthusiasts sales Ford did sell a thinly disguised civilian version. It was the Mercury Marauder. It didn't sell well and was discontinued.
The fastest current production cop car? The Dodge Charger with Hemi power.
The average human takes 500 to 1000 msec to shift gears. A well trained driver can bang the gears in 300 to 400 msec. An automatic can do the job in 50 to 150 msec. The shift mechanism in my old Charger was pretty sloppy and missed shifts were always a threat. I thought about the shift time delay, and set the car up to make the quarter mile in 3 gears. This unfortunately slowed the car down by over a second. The low speed acceleration was killed by the taller overall gearing.
I bought mine at the end of 2000; it was called Sentra SE with Performance Pack, but actually it was exactly what later was named SE-R. I'm still missing it...
Yes, it was a new car, at the end of 2006!
But you know... My Armada don't cause any fire when thinks less and goes faster. Looks like that Safety Department needs some staff reduction.
In Russia interceptors often were made to look like ordinary street cars, but had stronger engines. As the result, some drivers of special cars were telling stories how they had to carry in a cargo heavy metal things for balance.
Also, frames did not live long enough, also brakes were ordinary so when I see in movies how interceptors can't suddenly brake or turn, I believe them.
lol @ the Mussie...
fast in a straight line, but "challenged" when shown a change of direction. Having said that, any chance I have of securing a mid-60's fastback Mustang, I'm in there!!!
Sentras came out here in NZ from the early 1980's in various spec including a SSS version that had the 2 litre twincam engine, ABS tighened suspension etc etc. http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Motors/Cars/Nissan/Sentra/auction-241871050.htm Gooooooood fun!!! Also, they were one body size smaller than what Wave shows in his images - his image shows what we refer to as the Bluebird.
fast in a straight line, but "challenged" when shown a change of direction. Having said that, any chance I have of securing a mid-60's fastback Mustang, I'm in there!!!
Sentras came out here in NZ from the early 1980's in various spec including a SSS version that had the 2 litre twincam engine, ABS tighened suspension etc etc. http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Motors/Cars/Nissan/Sentra/auction-241871050.htm Gooooooood fun!!! Also, they were one body size smaller than what Wave shows in his images - his image shows what we refer to as the Bluebird.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.