difference between 5L and 4.6L stangs?

In my 93 XLT totally stock I can beat 3/4 of the 5L mustangs(straight drags from light to light), but when i try to race the newer mustangs, like the GTs, they beat me by a fair size gap.

Every one says there is no replacement for displacement, which is kinda dumb to me, but what makes the newer stangs so much better?

 

[Fred02X]

Never lost to a V6 stang when I had my 93 GT with just some bolt ons. V6 Camaro RS couldn't even keep up with my Mustang.....

94-95 = 5.0

96+ = 4.6

Yes autos are slower than a manual and the drop tops are said to be heavier and more prone to twisting under hard acceleration which can be cure with subframe connectors.

Can't wait to get some stuff done on my explorer.

 

[jjue]

I think that my roommate from college runs 14.8s on his '94 Mustang GT, and that 302 has over 150k miles on it. His '67 Mustang has a fuel-injected 351W in it, and it runs 11.7s, and he still has more tuning before he puts the blower on it. It would normally run faster with the heads and intake that he has, but the compression is 8.0:1 since he intended it to be a blower motor. He said that while the 4.6L Mustang is newer in technology, the limiting factor is the lack of airflow (which is finally solved with the Bullitt intake) and the lack of torque (pushrod vs. SOHC). I personally am not convinced of the new modular motors (mostly the 4.6L due to a lack of torque). If I buy a Mustang anytime soon, it might be old enough to have a 302 so that I know that I have low end torque & so that I can swap engine parts between the Stang and the Mountaineer.

 

[Magicfan25]

the new 4.6 in the GT packs 302ft lbs, not too bad. They respond only modestly to minor boltons, but they respond much better to boost than the 5.0 did.

The new V6 stangs do run in LOW 16s to mid 15s depending on auto, vert and driver.

 

[mikeresin]

5.0: 225hp 300tq
96-97 4.6: 225hp 290tq
98: 235hp 290tq
99+ 264hp 300tq

and yes tyhe 4.6 likes boost alot better then the 5.0

the 5.0 is best kept n/a, or sprayed

the 4.6 takes blowers really well

and they both fly with turbos on them

 

[codycr6]

Mustangs

My 1991 Special Service Package 5.0 coupe with a 302, 5-speed, and 3.08 gears went 13.90's@100 mph stock. The 1999 and up Mustangs do really respond to power adders well, but nobody really bothers with trying to make them fast naturally aspirated. Sean Hyland Motorsports and DSS Racing engines both offer built short blocks for those people who do want to make serious power with a 4.6, but it is still much cheaper to build and older Fox body to go fast. I built mine for around $13,000, and it gets 17 mpg and runs low 11's to high 10's and is driven two hours to the track.

 

[SaleenEXP]

Originally posted by Jason_25
I have a hard time believing that you can beat any mustang, including the 6 cylinder models. What gearing is your explorer? Is it a 5 speed? 2 wheel drive?

Exactly thats what I'm saying, I'm not calling you a lier or anything Silverblade, but even a 5.0 auto w/ 3.08 gears will still smoke your ass very bad. They have to be starting off in 3rd or something if you can beat them. 1st gen 4dr ohv will run 0-60 in about 10.5 seconds stock and in the 17's-18's for the quarter.

A stock 5.0 will be able to run mid-high 14's and even with a bad launch they will stay in the 15's.

And your right about getting beat badly by the 4.6 Mustangs, they are a hell of a lot faster than 5.0's.
My friend with his 2001 GT stock 5 speed and 3.27 gears ran a best of 13.91 at Morroso. Even an auto 4.6 will run a mid 14.

Even if they got a bad launch they would still smoke you bad and even if they start in 2nd they'll still beat you, unless they are a complete dumbass and try launching at 5000 rpms and then wonder why they stay in the same spot after they launch

Gotta love the modular 4.6, thats why I'm getting an 02' 4.6 Mounty, they will run a 15.8 stock at the quarter, the best I could get out of my moms 5.0 Mounty was about a 16.3, the 5.0 gets too winded even with mods, unlike the 4.6 which pulls hard as hell all the way to redline. My neighbors 02' 4.6 Ex. ran a 15.8 at Morroso also, shows you how quick the 02's are

You wouldn't even come close to keeping with an 02' 4.6 Ex/Mounty, so I have no idea how you beat 5.0s unless they seriously launch at 5000 rpm.

 

[JGAMBLE]

has anyone besides me noticed that if you take a 2.3 ohc out of a pinto. Weld 2 of em together and throw fuel injection in the middle you have a 4.6? Motor's not so advanced after all. Just a couple pinto motors welded together.

 

[LowdPypes]

power...

then add the inverter and a leaf blower and you have the new cobra's!

 

[JGAMBLE]

Wooohoooo!!!!! Think I saw some of them leaf blowers on e-bay. Gotta get me ona those. Outta make my otherwise stock X run 13's, and climb any rock I see

 

[mikeresin]

Originally posted by SaleenEXP



And your right about getting beat badly by the 4.6 Mustangs, they are a hell of a lot faster than 5.0's.
My friend with his 2001 GT stock 5 speed and 3.27 gears ran a best of 13.91 at Morroso. Even an auto 4.6 will run a mid 14.

.

i wouldnt say a hell of alot faster.
a if you lined up a stock 1990 5.0 and a stock 2000 4.6
both with under 90k miles on them the difference would be less than .4 secs.

thats not very much.

5.0s get a bad name becuase there are alot out there with very high milage and tired engines.

and the 5.0 explorer/mounty is a little different then the mustang 5.0

different cams.

my gt is modded and so is my buddies 4.6.
when we race we are just about dead even. he only pulls away at high speeds becuase hes done more suspension work to keep him on the ground.

 

[jasonf83]

Modular DOHC is the way to go!!!!!!!

 

[mikeresin]

Originally posted by jasonf83
Modular DOHC is the way to go!!!!!!!

too expensive to mod
if ya have the money then cool.
but its way too expensive

and ya can build 5.0s to be 7 sec cars alot easier then 4.6's