racing
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,562
Likes: 424
From: Long Island USA
Originally posted by gtex
You didn't think I was lying, did ya?
I'm not helping with the topic either..oh well. then again the topic is, "racing". That's pretty broad :-)
What's an MN12? The body style? I'm actually impressed that you get 25 with a Ford V8 product.
I have never understood why Ford's mileage is so poor Maybe you're onto something. Maybe they like to run rich, probably helps prolong the life of some hardware.
I just know I've owned 5 Ford Trucks. Almost none got 15 MPG or better. Including 300 I6 5spd 1/2 ton shortbed, 5.4 V8, 352, 360, 390 and the mongrul 446 :-) meanwhile my friends or family were getting 18+MPG in their 350 powered extended cab Chebys.
You didn't think I was lying, did ya?
I'm not helping with the topic either..oh well. then again the topic is, "racing". That's pretty broad :-)
What's an MN12? The body style? I'm actually impressed that you get 25 with a Ford V8 product.
I have never understood why Ford's mileage is so poor Maybe you're onto something. Maybe they like to run rich, probably helps prolong the life of some hardware.
I just know I've owned 5 Ford Trucks. Almost none got 15 MPG or better. Including 300 I6 5spd 1/2 ton shortbed, 5.4 V8, 352, 360, 390 and the mongrul 446 :-) meanwhile my friends or family were getting 18+MPG in their 350 powered extended cab Chebys.
The MN12 is t-bird/cougar from '89-97 - came with NA 3.8L V6, Supercharged 3.8L V6 (otherwise known as the Thunderbird SC), 5.0's were an option, and then in '94 the 4.6L was available. in '96 they dropped the SC.
Funny thing was the SC 3.8L was rated at 220 HP, while the Mustang 5.0L was 225. But the SC put out more torque. They were close to being (if not were) Mustang killers out of the box.
SC's topped out higher than the Mustang, and even now with the Cobra, a likewise engined MN12 could top out even higher than the Cobra, I'm sure.
My '01 F250 V10 6.8L gets 16-16.5 on the highway even with 1000lbs in the back doing 75MPH. Not too shabby for a 415 cube that puts out 425ft/lbs torque NET. I'm lucky my FE 390 gets close to that GROSS, and the V10 is factory... unlike my 390
Lead Driver
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 6,175
Likes: 21
From: Texas
Originally posted by krewat
[B
My '01 F250 V10 6.8L gets 16-16.5 on the highway even with 1000lbs in the back doing 75MPH. Not too shabby for a 415 cube that puts out 425ft/lbs torque NET. I'm lucky my FE 390 gets close to that GROSS, and the V10 is factory... unlike my 390 [/B]
[B
My '01 F250 V10 6.8L gets 16-16.5 on the highway even with 1000lbs in the back doing 75MPH. Not too shabby for a 415 cube that puts out 425ft/lbs torque NET. I'm lucky my FE 390 gets close to that GROSS, and the V10 is factory... unlike my 390
[/B]
WOW. what tranny/gears are you runinng in that F250? I always heard the V10 was terrible for gas mileage.
I wanted a T-Bird SC for a long time. I just liked the way it looked.
Never heard them called an MN12 before..
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,562
Likes: 424
From: Long Island USA
Originally posted by gtex
WOW. what tranny/gears are you runinng in that F250? I always heard the V10 was terrible for gas mileage.
I wanted a T-Bird SC for a long time. I just liked the way it looked.
Never heard them called an MN12 before..
WOW. what tranny/gears are you runinng in that F250? I always heard the V10 was terrible for gas mileage.
I wanted a T-Bird SC for a long time. I just liked the way it looked.
Never heard them called an MN12 before..
Towing heavy, I've heard less than 10, and I can get it down to 5MPG stop-and-go (hey, THAT's why those tires have no tread left)...
But for the power, 80% of peak torque at 1000RPM, and 425ft/lbs NET ? People pulling trailers out of toll booths with the 6-speed in 2nd and foot half-way to the floor are spinnnig their DRW's ... deep skirt block, like the FE, and cross-bolted mains and a steel crank.
Still like my FE though... but I keep thinking what would happen if I put a V10 into my '74 F250 (with a blower)
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
Originally posted by krewat
Still like my FE though... but I keep thinking what would happen if I put a V10 into my '74 F250 (with a blower)
Still like my FE though... but I keep thinking what would happen if I put a V10 into my '74 F250 (with a blower)
Postmaster
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 1
From: Littleton, CO
Welllll, sorry I said that 
Greg-you are right, I plain forgot about the SS and I was referring to a range approximate with what fordman's buddy is running (shhh, I own some GM stuff too).
I must admit that the Turbo T was quite a ride also. I had the priveledge of tune'in and test drivin one, lucky for me there were some open country roads available
LMAO!!! --Mike
Greg-you are right, I plain forgot about the SS and I was referring to a range approximate with what fordman's buddy is running (shhh, I own some GM stuff too).
I must admit that the Turbo T was quite a ride also. I had the priveledge of tune'in and test drivin one, lucky for me there were some open country roads available
LMAO!!! --Mike
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 541
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix Az, by way of Fre
Originally posted by krewat
I thought you typoed and meant to say "20" ...
The MN12 is t-bird/cougar from '89-97 - came with NA 3.8L V6, Supercharged 3.8L V6 (otherwise known as the Thunderbird SC), 5.0's were an option, and then in '94 the 4.6L was available. in '96 they dropped the SC.
Funny thing was the SC 3.8L was rated at 220 HP, while the Mustang 5.0L was 225. But the SC put out more torque. They were close to being (if not were) Mustang killers out of the box.
SC's topped out higher than the Mustang, and even now with the Cobra, a likewise engined MN12 could top out even higher than the Cobra, I'm sure.
I thought you typoed and meant to say "20" ...
The MN12 is t-bird/cougar from '89-97 - came with NA 3.8L V6, Supercharged 3.8L V6 (otherwise known as the Thunderbird SC), 5.0's were an option, and then in '94 the 4.6L was available. in '96 they dropped the SC.
Funny thing was the SC 3.8L was rated at 220 HP, while the Mustang 5.0L was 225. But the SC put out more torque. They were close to being (if not were) Mustang killers out of the box.
SC's topped out higher than the Mustang, and even now with the Cobra, a likewise engined MN12 could top out even higher than the Cobra, I'm sure.
.The TC's are very nice cars, but are too heavy to play the the Fox mustang crowd in the 1/4 mile game.
I would not dispute your top end claim, I've had my 5.0LX wound out at over 156mph... at the time it had 3.73's, off road h-pipe and u/d pullies... all else was stock original equipment... I doubt it would pull that high with the 3.08's tho... magazines used to say 138mph for top end stock... I believe it, and I would not be supried to see the stock 3.73 equiped TC's to run past 138mph... not to mention how comfy and quietly it would do so...
Now, my stock 5.0 motor'd full weight LX runs 12.9's, impressive time for stock motor, but if I were to run your TC from a roll out on the highway I should imagine I'd get a real good look at the back of that TC, as my 1/4 times are more about traction and 1/8th mile than putting impressive power down.
To the original post'r...
I'd be suprised if the 50 shot made much of a change on the distance between you and the vert V6 pony. That's gonna be about 30hp at the wheels... possibly less... I'd also be suprised if the 100 shot put you ahead thru the traps, definatly closer, but not likely ahead.
As suggested, find an 1/8 mile track to bully those little cars.
Last edited by cleanLX; Feb 19, 2004 at 05:03 PM.
Postmaster
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,934
Likes: 0
From: iowa
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Lead Driver
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 6,175
Likes: 21
From: Texas
Seems quick to me as well. But, if your cars is running 12.9s, it will walk a Tbird SC from any speed, provided you're not running 4.56 gears or somthing so tall you run out of gear on the top end.
My car put 307 HP to the ground, so let's call it 350 crank. It runs low 13s with a good driver. They have seen high 12s with superb drivers, and all the stars in alignment. It's a bit of a heavy car, around 3600-3800lbs loaded. What does a 92ish Fox body weigh?
My car put 307 HP to the ground, so let's call it 350 crank. It runs low 13s with a good driver. They have seen high 12s with superb drivers, and all the stars in alignment. It's a bit of a heavy car, around 3600-3800lbs loaded. What does a 92ish Fox body weigh?
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 541
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix Az, by way of Fre
oh ya... sorry... it only went 13.26 in that configuration.
it now sports long tube headers, 4.10's and a 76mm mass air meter.
3240lb race weight, 1.70 short times, 84mph in the 1/8th. 234hp and 292tq. 2600d/a is the best weather it's run in... *should* go 12.6's @ 109 at sea level.
mental addiction motorsports
check under customer cars...
it now sports long tube headers, 4.10's and a 76mm mass air meter.
3240lb race weight, 1.70 short times, 84mph in the 1/8th. 234hp and 292tq. 2600d/a is the best weather it's run in... *should* go 12.6's @ 109 at sea level.
mental addiction motorsports
check under customer cars...
Last edited by cleanLX; Feb 19, 2004 at 05:20 PM.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,562
Likes: 424
From: Long Island USA
Originally posted by cleanLX
The TC's are very nice cars, but are too heavy to play the the Fox mustang crowd in the 1/4 mile game.
I would not dispute your top end claim, I've had my 5.0LX wound out at over 156mph... at the time it had 3.73's, off road h-pipe and u/d pullies... all else was stock original equipment... I doubt it would pull that high with the 3.08's tho...
The TC's are very nice cars, but are too heavy to play the the Fox mustang crowd in the 1/4 mile game.
I would not dispute your top end claim, I've had my 5.0LX wound out at over 156mph... at the time it had 3.73's, off road h-pipe and u/d pullies... all else was stock original equipment... I doubt it would pull that high with the 3.08's tho...
When you say "LX", do you mean Mustang or 'bird? Two entirely different species there...
To clarify, if the MN12 and the Mustang both have the same engine, same gear, theoretical top-end is going to be higher for the MN12.
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 541
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix Az, by way of Fre
Originally posted by krewat
Do you mean Turbo Coupe or Super Coupe? Two different breeds of Ford 'birds
When you say "LX", do you mean Mustang or 'bird? Two entirely different species there...
To clarify, if the MN12 and the Mustang both have the same engine, same gear, theoretical top-end is going to be higher for the MN12.
Do you mean Turbo Coupe or Super Coupe? Two different breeds of Ford 'birds
When you say "LX", do you mean Mustang or 'bird? Two entirely different species there...
To clarify, if the MN12 and the Mustang both have the same engine, same gear, theoretical top-end is going to be higher for the MN12.
I meant Super Coupe, but did abbriviate for Turbo Coupe. Yes, very different animals.
LX, Mustang...
top speed, stock, agree'd...
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 779
Likes: 9
From: Tumwater, Wa
Originally posted by Ratsmoker
I can see a shortbed 390 truck running low 16s maybe. I'll tell you this:
I can see a shortbed 390 truck running low 16s maybe. I'll tell you this:
Recipie:
www.cardomain.com/id/pat67shorty
