4.0 vs. 3.8

[Melon]

Respect the car? Yeah, but how many of us want a 9 sec car? Honestly. I don't - I want something quick and fun to drive, but not something so fast I can't step on the gas and have to worry about where the car is going to go. My friend has a Lincoln Mark VIII with a Vortech and supporting mods and made 390 RWHP. Sure, the boost doesn't come up to until higher RPM's but he says he can break the tires loose at 55-60. That could partially be the tires, but not entirely.

And how many of us can afford to build and maintain a 9 sec racer? It either takes alot of money to build it right so it doesn't break - or alot of money to fix it when it's not built right and breaks all the time.

-Melon

 

[rocket 5979]

I can't see why anyone wouldn't respect a 9 second v6 mustang. Not just one, but many. Oh well.

No one said they do not respect those particular cars. But those 9 second V6 Mustang's are VERY VERY VERY few and far between. Show me a single 9 second V6 Mustang and I will show you 500+ V8 Mustangs in the 9's or lower. A 9 second V6 Mustang just isn't common enough to really be included in the "You should respect 3.8 Mustangs" discussion which makes it a very assinine example. Were we talking about fully built dragracing vehicles here? No. We were talking about the average car. The average 3.8 V6 Mustang is exactly like I said before. That is the reason why most Mustangers do not respect them.

 

[Jakee]

I really don't care about the 3.8 mustang but I am impressed with what I've seen from the v6 mustang crowd. I know we weren't talking about a built car but I don't really see how a 3.8 mustang VS 4.0 Explorer in stock form relates at all. I stated my opinion and shared the knowledge that I do have with the 3.8 motors potential, and even posted a source if anyone wanted to verify what I'm saying in the future. And yes, you're going to see more v8 mustangs in the lower digits because that's an easy win. Buy a light car with a big motor; mod away and you've got a fast car. Anyone can do with the money.
Now take a car that you own - make due with what you have (in a 3.8 v6 mustang case too) build a fast car that doesn’t have a lot of "just buy this kit and your fast" type parts and you've got my respect. I can't talk anyone to seeing it my way but I sure don't want anyone referring to me as a "poser" (not saying anyone did, but putting myself in a v6 mustang's dudes place) because I have a v6 - and if they did, I'd say line that v8 up and prey you don't miss a gear or loose traction, cuss I'm coming for you.

Melon - I agree with you. There is a point that you don't cross with vehicle / motor combinations. For a street car, the trick is to find that point and stay there. Enjoy the work you put in it and don't worry about pushing the motor till you have a failure. Now if we're talking racing, you do the opposite, unless of course you want to finish last every time.

 

[Chainblade]

I've owned a 99 v6 mustang and a 2000 v6 mustang. They felt faster than the 94 and 92 Explorer I have owned. I'd think the mustang would win because of weight but that's just a guess.

i'm not sure why there is so much hate for V6 mustangs. They have their purpose. I liked mine because they are inexpensive to buy, ok gas mileage, cheaper insurance, and have a sports car look. I really could care less if it's going to be faster than anything on the road. i just wanted to get from A to B and look good doing it. Sure, if I was rich, I would had gotten the V8 because they look better and would be more fun to drive. It's the same thing with my Explorer. I don't do any off roading but I have bigger tires, nicer rims, and will be getting a lift. Partly because I'm 6'6" and want my Explorer higher off the ground but also for looks.

 

[rocket 5979]

i'm not sure why there is so much hate for V6 mustangs. They have their purpose. I liked mine because they are inexpensive to buy, ok gas mileage, cheaper insurance, and have a sports car look. I really could care less if it's going to be faster than anything on the road. i just wanted to get from A to B and look good doing it. Sure, if I was rich, I would had gotten the V8 because they look better and would be more fun to drive. It's the same thing with my Explorer. I don't do any off roading but I have bigger tires, nicer rims, and will be getting a lift. Partly because I'm 6'6" and want my Explorer higher off the ground but also for looks.

I cannot speak for everyone here but I do not really think it is "hate". Just not allot of respect; which I find to be a large difference. I suppose what I am trying to say that even if I seen a V6 Mustang guy pull up and try to BS about cars I would be just as polite to him as if he had any other car. Some people go way beyond just not respecting a vehicle and start disrespecting the person or needlessly talking badly about their vehicle to their face. That is where I draw the line. Heck, even if I run into an import kid I will talk tech and BS with them, assuming that they know how to properly conduct themselves.

 

[Joe Dirt]

I'll respect a 9 second V6- if it's a 9 second quarter mile. I'll respect a sub 9 second turbo 4 Mustang- they're up here. Sure- a lot of cars are 'different' and cool in their own right, and I like cars that are different... But just because it's different doesn't mean it's good. Under 13's in a 1/4 mile is 'fast' 13's are marginal. Past that- nah, not fast. I tire of the "It runs 14's and it's an xxxxxxxxx." No- I don't care- that's not fast.

Worse yet- I don't care if you've got pipes, intakes, and fer cripes sakes- pointless Corbeau seats... 16 second 1/4 mile times aren't fast. I don't care if it's "fast for the car" or "great HP per litre" or whatever other arguments people use to make their econobox cars seem fast. It's not fast. I remember taking my Mustang to the track, and waiting for 45-60 minutes to run a 1/4 pass because there were 100 Eclipses, Corollas, Minivans, and untuned duallies in the staging lanes. Now you absolutely have a right to run your car, but stop talking about how fast they are. They can look nice, but they're not fast. I laugh when I see people talking crap about their 15 second cars. Come on.

Aside from that, the Mustang nameplate is a car, not an engine. What did the original 60's models run 1.4 mile? All of them have a place- even the Mustang II. Sure they were mental abortions, but they allowed the nameplate to run until the Foxbodies came out. Doesn't mean any of them were fast- even the stock Foxbodies needed some help.

 

[jah81592]

would the v6 win because of wheight difference? in talking like about a 4.0 explorer sport the 2 door version vs. the 5.0 4 door version

The 4.0 sohc is just a bad ass engine! I likey. If only Ford built thier standard V-8's to run like this little motor. It would be on. Very impressive non the less.

 

[Jakee]

The 4.0 sohc is just a bad ass engine! I likey. If only Ford built thier standard V-8's to run like this little motor. It would be on. Very impressive non the less.

James - How many v8's have you embarrassed with that 4.0 SOHC?

I've managed to get 3 under my belt so far, one was modded pretty good, the others didn’t expect my explorer to do what it did. Then one v6 camaro got so embarrassed he turned off the road and headed for the hills. -- I have not lost yet to any V8.

By the way James, I've been able to run around 16 degree's of timing advance so far. I haven't got any knock but I did blow out the spark a couple times. I've locked it down so I can enjoy the truck for awhile, and then I'll push it further.

 

[CCr]

ok, now I am taking this as a personal challenge. my mom has a 2000 hardtop v6 mustang, dad has a 2002 hardtop v6 mustang, I have the 4.0sohc. I'll goad them into a race and come back with the results. none of us have any mods except
i.m lifted 3 inches. this may take a while as I am on an oil rig and will be for another 5-6 days. when I get home I may have a few weeks off and then I'll have internet again at my next rig. so just a heads up. and I hope I don't forget

 

[big5dogg]

ive only beaten my friends 97 5.0 explorer with my 4.0

 

[TBaker]

I raced a 3.8 mustang in my 4.0 SOHC explorer sport. the mustangs are slow, all i have is intake and exhaust and wider tires. i won by 3 to 5 car lengths easy.

 

[99XJeep]

My '98 OHV Ex outran a Cherokee from a stoplight with a 3.73 rear.

:fire: No, they weren't even racing. I test drove a 94 Explorer 4wd with 87k miles and it had no balls anywhere. Cherokee's low end torque and lightweight(curb weight of 2992 lbs in the owner's manual, with options around 3100-3200) gives them a distinct advantage off the line(231 lb-ft @ 2700 rpm), I even beat my buddy's 260 hp 04 Mustang GT 5-speed to 15-20 mph, after that it wasn't even close. Key is to turn off the a/c and brake torque, then it hooks up and pins you in the back of your seat. I beat my buddy's 4.0 SOHC Explorer V6 by 2-3 cars by 60 mph.

Here's a vid of a V8 Explorer barely edging past an early 90's HO with 280k miles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNchKbLSpJk

 

[99XJeep]

I got here because I googled 4.0 vs 3.8 and was looking for the Jeep 4.0 I-6 and 3.8 V6(POS IMO).