92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:ronholm wrote: So how many SVO's have been in the top ten of the GRM challenge?I'm guessing that has more to do with the fact that the cost of entry isn't so low... because they're actually worth something.(I like turbo mopars, too)
In defense of the SVO differences, (and we're talking 1984 here) 16" 5-lug wheels, 4WDB, adjustable Koni shocks, early cars had slapper bars, later = quadra-shock rear suspension.
Drawbacks= silly top mounted intercooler...and price.
Seeing as how this thread has devolved into name-calling, bench-racing, and sweeping, inaccurate generalizations, I will bid you all farewell.
In reply to belteshazzar:
He's pointing out that you say 5.0 guys don't think highly of winning against fwd 4 banger dodges while ignoring that the same 5.0 guys wouldn't think highly of winning against a 4 banger mustang.
i see that, and it's turning things around.
in case it matters, i didn't bring up the "omg i beet five point ohs all day" when i talk about my turbo lima. conversely, the pro-mopar contributors to this thread said it more than once.
I'm just finding it amusing that the straight line prowess of a 5.0 is a benchmark.
1988 Ford Probe GT 7.3 15.6
1991 Ford Mustang GT 7.3 15.6
1986 Dodge Shelby GLHS 6.5 14.8
1991 Dodge Spirit R/T 6.5 15.0
1987 Dodge Shelby CSX 7.0 15.4
1984 Ford Mustang SVO 7.9 15.8
1988 Mazda MX-6 7.5 15.7
I mean... for the most part, it's a driver's race. (Barring probably the GLHS.)
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
You must not have a lot of 5.0 experience. Google the "15 minute tune up". You could spend, literally, 15 minutes in the pit lane at a track and drop a stone-stock 5.0 into the 14's.
After that, every bolt-on is like magic because the 5.0 was so under-optimized and the chassis was so light. So when people talk about racing 5.0's, they are usually 12-second cars.
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
late 80s 5.0s with 5-speeds could run mid to low 14s in stick for. Quickest were the 5.0 LX 5-speed with the trunk. Tony De Feo at Muscle Cars magazine (might have been Cars Illustrated), in 1987 or so, got a bone stock LX into the high 13s with tuning (not tuner parts), but tuning the car, playing with tire pressusers and cooling the intake manifold between runs. Auto cars would run in the 15s. 5-speed cars were in the 14s. The 5.0 5- speed LX was faster thhan either GLHS in stock form. However, the GLHS could be made to go faster, more cheaply than the 5.0.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: I'm just finding it amusing that the straight line prowess of a 5.0 is a benchmark.
It isn't so much a benchmark for me in the sense that I think they are fast.. Just that so many other people do because in stock form they sound fast.. and can spin the tires..
It just makes them fun to pick on...
My neighbor at one point had a long wheelbase caravan.. He used to enjoy beating on me in any one of my daytona's.. He worked for Mopar at the time and had it all fixed up with an S60 package.. whatever.. the old van ran awesome..
This was the quintessential fat bald guy in a minivan..
I rode up to the parts store one day with him (working on his wife's ford) and we got stopped next to the iconic red 89 mustang GT.. Stupid sideways hat kid with pretty little girlfriend... Of course my neighbor starts reving up and prompting the kid to hit it... The poor idiot didn't have a chance.. He goes peeling out.. My neighbor let him have a couple before just blowing by... The next light the kid is all jacked up.. He is going to show us... The girlfriend is laughing.. and again.. my neighbor pulls ahead.. Slows down.. Pulls away again.. The kid wouldn't even look over at the next light and the girlfriend is just about hysterical at this point.
Now I imagine that would be almost as much fun in and SVO..
It is easy to like the shelby dodge crowd.. Generally they all have a great automotive sense of humor.
From what I am gathering in this thread.. With several exceptions it would seem a good chunk of the SVO isn't to far removed from the sideways hat mustang crowd.. and I just don't have time for it..
Javelin wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: You must not have a lot of 5.0 experience. Google the "15 minute tune up". You could spend, literally, 15 minutes in the pit lane at a track and drop a stone-stock 5.0 into the 14's. After that, every bolt-on is like magic because the 5.0 was so under-optimized and the chassis was so light. So when people talk about racing 5.0's, they are usually 12-second cars.
Oh I get that the engine has tons of potential.. Just like a Shelby Dodge..
The trouble is back in the day most of them on the street thought they all had 12 second cars... and they didn't...
Don't mind me... this thread remind me of this sketch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GH7pfVvCII
I'm just having a bit of fun....
turboswede wrote: Don't mind me... this thread remind me of this sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GH7pfVvCII I'm just having a bit of fun....
JFX001 wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:In defense of the SVO differences, (and we're talking 1984 here) 16" 5-lug wheels, 4WDB, adjustable Koni shocks, early cars had slapper bars, later = quadra-shock rear suspension. Drawbacks= silly top mounted intercooler...and price.ronholm wrote: So how many SVO's have been in the top ten of the GRM challenge?I'm guessing that has more to do with the fact that the cost of entry isn't so low... because they're actually worth something.
So collector prices keep SVO's out of the challenge.. As well as real GLHS cars.. WIth koni's ect...
So where are all the 2.3 turbo mustangs at the challenge?
Oh wait..
That's right..
Now I remember..
you jump around a lot when you're trying to make a point
Javelin wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: You must not have a lot of 5.0 experience. Google the "15 minute tune up". You could spend, literally, 15 minutes in the pit lane at a track and drop a stone-stock 5.0 into the 14's. After that, every bolt-on is like magic because the 5.0 was so under-optimized and the chassis was so light. So when people talk about racing 5.0's, they are usually 12-second cars.
I'm aware.... i live in drag race central.
But in terms of hands on experience, i only have experience with one car on my list.
ronholm wrote:Javelin wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: You must not have a lot of 5.0 experience. Google the "15 minute tune up". You could spend, literally, 15 minutes in the pit lane at a track and drop a stone-stock 5.0 into the 14's. After that, every bolt-on is like magic because the 5.0 was so under-optimized and the chassis was so light. So when people talk about racing 5.0's, they are usually 12-second cars.Oh I get that the engine has tons of potential.. Just like a Shelby Dodge.. The trouble is back in the day most of them on the street thought they all had 12 second cars... and they didn't...
They still do. And they still don't.
Well on your list I've owned a 1st Gen Turbo Probe GT, a Mazda MX-6, a Turbo AWD DSM, a Mustang 5.0, a TBird Turbo Coupe (which btw, is a Fox chassis like the Mustang, not some fat pig 
), and a V6 Shadow. Additionally, I've driven a Turbo Omni (not a GLHS though), a Shelby Charger, and an SVO.
From those first-hand experiences, the turbo Mopar is the clear performance winner against everything except the DSM and the 5.0, and the 3 of those can go at each other pound-for-pound and mod-for-mod. The Probe/MX-6 isn't anywhere near the same league of turbo car as the others.
belteshazzar wrote: you jump around a lot when you're trying to make a point
Sorry..
I just hear people talking 80's mustang and it gets me all fired up...
just last year a buddy of mine had to have this 87 (maybe 88 I can't remember) Ttop car.. 5.0.. 5spd. He was carrying one and on about how fast this thing was going to be while I handed him wrenches.. I had offered up my shop so he could put it together.. I even went with him to buy some parts/cars from a couple of the stereotypical mustang idiots.. laughing all the way..
It was sold almost seconds after he couldn't keep up with my lightly modded minivan.. even after his best attempts to tune the thing up..
this is the van
And the GLHS weighs damn near 1200 lbs less than my van... and the drivetrain is a simple easy bolt in...
In my eyes the SVO guys are just worried about kicking 5.0 butt.. and frankly I think it is pretty clear there are much better ways to go about that..
Javelin wrote: Well on your list I've owned a 1st Gen Turbo Probe GT, a Mazda MX-6, a Turbo AWD DSM, a Mustang 5.0, a TBird Turbo Coupe (which btw, is a Fox chassis like the Mustang, not some fat pig
Ok looks like the mopar wins then. Consider my input in this thread null and void.
I don't know that i would call putting a DSM in the ring against a turbo Mopar exactly fair to the Mopar, but then again, i only have DSM experience out of that pairing. I'm not seeing too many 1000whp Mopar 2.2s.
What modifications did you do to each car?
The only reason this is a contest is because the SVO is RWD,
True..
'll buy that a Chrysler 2.2T is better than a Ford 2.3T. But I won't buy that an Omni is better than a Mustang, unless the goal is hauling more people or getting better fuel economy.
Also true..
What kind of power does the GLH make?
GLHS makes about 160whp stock, in good tune.. high 14s. With ONLY injectors, map sensor, exhaust, and a chip to match the injector and map sensor scaling, you can get them to 230-260whp depending on how hard you try. For 2500 lbs that's pretty good. Stock turbo on stock longblock will take it into the high 12s @107-110 if you really wring it out. In other words all you have to do to make a GLHS as fast as a stock LS1 car is add fuel.
does the dodge have a limited slip differential?
No but the ebay have one! Quaife-style torque-biasing helical diff for $400-450. Probably about the same as replacing the stock svo one that hasn't worked in 17 years since that one time that guy 3 owners back ran a space saver for 200 miles.. Im sure some of them are still working, though.
i bought an 8.8 with a tight trac-loc and 3.55 gears for $125, complete. theyre around every corner, and take two hours to swap the whole assembly.
ronholm wrote: Sorry.. I just hear people talking 80's mustang and it gets me all fired up...
lol, I can see that!
At least you get worked up about car stuff. Could be worse.
To be completely honest, if you buy a stock glhs and wanted to drag race on slicks, you would ideally want to spend about $1k on a junkyard trans, helical diff, and shifter and cables (stock is rod-shifted), and clutch.
On the plus side, if you get the right trans (there are many that will bolt up, but they all cost the same in the junkyard..) and clutch, you will end up with a driveline that pretty much can't be broken with any amount of power you will actually make. Even the 10 second 5spd guys in the turbo dodge community dont break the strong trannies with power.
belteshazzar wrote: i bought an 8.8 with a tight trac-loc and 3.55 gears for $125, complete. theyre around every corner, and take two hours to swap the whole assembly.
That would be awesome behind a twin turbo five slow..
I hear the turbos on a 2.2/2.5 are cheap and easy enough to find and sized just about right..
At my heart I am a 4cly turbo guy.. but I simply can't make any sense of the SVO..
i had to assemble my own because of price point. used an '86 turbo thunderbird and an '89 mustang LX. had $900 in it total, running and driving, before i started putting non-original parts on it.
The SVO's forte was balance and handling. We had Eibach wind coils for resale, Steeda helped develop a strut tower and chassis bracing. I had some JBA stuff as well, but I was more into road courses.I knew stock for stock a 5-0 would clean my clock on the strip.
Hey, I nullified my vote by wanting both
I don't know how many 2.3T mustangs were at the Challenge, but I believe there was a '65 coupe, and a Cortina.
You'll need to log in to post.
