Stock HP, 1979-2004, question.

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Mar 29, 2005 | 05:59 PM

Jack The Ripper

Guest

Posts: n/a

Stock HP, 1979-2004, question.

Found this on the web. Thought it was interesting, but i was suprised to see what it says about the 5.0's

According to this the 94/95 5.0's were the strongest with 240hp??

Is this at all accurate? I dont know much about the 5.0's but i used to have a roomate with one and he was always tellin me they have about 280-300hp stock. All he had done with his was an intake and offroad x-pipe and i remember that thing totally hauled ***.

Does this look correct?

HP ratings of the Fox-bodied V8 Mustangs

1979 5.0 2 bbl 140 hp
1980-81 4.2 2 bbl 120 hp
1982 5.0 2 bbl 157 4.2 (w/auto) 2 bbl 120 hp
1983 5.0 4 bbl 175 hp
1984 5.0 4 bbl 175 Throttle body FI (w/auto) 165 hp
1985 5.0 4 bbl 210 Throttle body FI (w/auto) 180 hp
1986 5.0 SEFI SD 200 hp
1987 5.0 SEFI SD 225 hp
1988 5.0 SEFI SD, MAF (Calif) 225 hp
1989-92 5.0 SEFI MAF 225 hp
1993 5.0 SEFI MAF 205hp 5.0 Cobra
1994-95 5.0 OHV 215hp @ 4200 / 5.0 OHV 240hp @ 4800
1996-97 4.6 SOHC 215hp @ 4400 / 4.6 DOHC 305hp @ 5800
1998 4.6 SOHC 225hp @ 4750 / 4.6 DOHC 305hp @ 5800
1999-02 4.6 SOHC 260hp @ 5250 /4.6 DOHC 320hp @ 6000 /
Bullitt 4.6 SOHC 265hp @ 5250
MachI 4.6 DOHC 305hp @ 5800
2003-04 4.6 DOHC 390 @ 6000

Mar 29, 2005 | 06:02 PM

03gtmustang

Super Moderator

Joined: Jan 2005

Posts: 3,440

From: Northern Va

Looks pretty accurate, stock 5.0's never had 280-300 stock.

Mar 29, 2005 | 06:04 PM

Jack The Ripper

Guest

Posts: n/a

So what is it that gives the 5.0's thier reputation?
Maybe my ex roomates was not stock. Dont talk to him much either. Kinda a dirtbag.

So were they geared differently?

They look smaller and lighter.

Stock 2000-2004 GT vs. Stock 94/95 GT, who has the edge and why?

Mar 29, 2005 | 06:06 PM

WaterDR

Administrator

Joined: Sep 2004

Posts: 6,613

Ditto. Those lists look right to me. Actually, I thought that 240 hp number on that cobra was only 230. But it is probably correct at 240 as the lists states.

Mar 29, 2005 | 06:48 PM

03gtmustang

Super Moderator

Joined: Jan 2005

Posts: 3,440

From: Northern Va

2000-2004 have more power man. Not really a close race between them.

Mar 29, 2005 | 07:02 PM

ThePunisher

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2004

Posts: 632

Quote:

Originally Posted by slappy

I had a 89 5.0, 5-speed, with just a bit of tweeking and it had serious punch out of the hole. It had 3.08 gears in it so thats not it. It didnt need to come on cam to have power. It just had it. Sizewize, I think it was real close to my 2001 GT. Not sure which of the cars would have a edge. In 94, they changed the intake manifold and cam and don't think it had quite the same punch as the previous models but I never drove one of that year.

Mar 29, 2005 | 07:08 PM

Jack The Ripper

Guest

Posts: n/a

Wow.
No kiddin..... I really diddnt expect that, with the way a lot of people talk about the 5.0's.

Well, thanks to all of you for clarifying this to my ignorant ***. ROFL

Mar 30, 2005 | 01:33 AM

stealth stang 90

street sleeper

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 112

From: akron ohio

Quote:

Originally Posted by slappy

They can be any where from 100lbs to 300lbs lighter than 94 and newer mustangs depending on what model My Lx hatch ways 3357 with my big but in it 225lbs notch backs only way about 3000lbs A stock 5spd notch would run with a 2000-04 gt providing it has a good driver