whats your average 94 -95 auto dyno - Northern California Ford Owners

This is topic whats your average 94 -95 auto dyno in forum General Talk at Northern California Ford Owners .

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://californiafords.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=052165

Posted by 302n/a (Member # 1465) on :

thinking of buying a 95gt auto whats your average hci dyno around for an auto?and quarter mile times?

Posted by CornOil_&_Boost (Member # 5888) on :

Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.

[ January 25, 2012, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: CornOil_&_Boost ]

Posted by DIRTY SALLY (Member # 7845) on :

1.000.000 HP! HAHHAHAHAHAHA!

Posted by 302n/a (Member # 1465) on :

quote:
Originally posted by CornOil_&_Boost:
Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.

so a stock 99-04gt will probable beat it?

Posted by RONIN (Member # 9987) on :

quote:
Originally posted by CornOil_&_Boost:
Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.

I doubt that ..... A bone stock 94/95 5 Liter would be lucky to even see 180-200 hp and 220-240 in torque. However I do agree that they are underpowered heavy pigs . There's far more restrictive parts on them i.e. why they make so little power . I'll try pull up some dyno charts of what a bone stock SN-95 makes and post them up.

Posted by losbadgts (Member # 4394) on :

quote:
Originally posted by 302n/a:

quote:
Originally posted by CornOil_&_Boost:
Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.
so a stock 99-04gt will probable beat it?

The right driver on the 99-04 gt and yes it will beat it all day lol.

Posted by Luke87GT (Member # 21) on :

Your average automatic 94-95 GT with HCI is going to be neck and neck with a bone stock Nissan Maxima owned by your mom.

Best of luck.

Posted by hidnn.o.s. (Member # 1219) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RONIN:

quote:
Originally posted by CornOil_&_Boost:
Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.
I doubt that ..... A bone stock 94/95 5 Liter would be lucky to even see 180-200 hp and 220-240 in torque. However I do agree that they are underpowered heavy pigs . There's far more restrictive parts on them i.e. why they make so little power . I'll try pull up some dyno charts of what a bone stock SN-95 makes and post them up.

Posted by SydeWaySix (Member # 3596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Luke87GT:
Your average automatic 94-95 GT with HCI is going to be neck and neck with a bone stock Nissan Maxima owned by your mom.

Best of luck.

the painful truth [dance]

Posted by stangrus95 (Member # 10653) on :

My 95 made 275rwhp and 321rwtq with h/c/i but its a 5speed

Posted by Blind (Member # 3052) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RONIN:

quote:
Originally posted by CornOil_&_Boost:
Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.
I doubt that ..... A bone stock 94/95 5 Liter would be lucky to even see 180-200 hp and 220-240 in torque. However I do agree that they are underpowered heavy pigs . There's far more restrictive parts on them i.e. why they make so little power . I'll try pull up some dyno charts of what a bone stock SN-95 makes and post them up.

the question is what they would make with h/c/i, not stock.

Posted by CornOil_&_Boost (Member # 5888) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RONIN:

quote:
Originally posted by CornOil_&_Boost:
Probably around 250-270rw and high13s/low14s....the 95 gt's were slow, underpowered, and heavy pigs....

You need a tune to actually get anything out of them.
I doubt that ..... A bone stock 94/95 5 Liter would be lucky to even see 180-200 hp and 220-240 in torque. However I do agree that they are underpowered heavy pigs . There's far more restrictive parts on them i.e. why they make so little power . I'll try pull up some dyno charts of what a bone stock SN-95 makes and post them up.

Posted by RONIN (Member # 9987) on :

I guess I missed the hci part..... They're still slugs though

Fuck you cornoil ... Lol

[ January 25, 2012, 03:26 PM: Message edited by: RONIN ]

Posted by Platinum Detail (Member # 8026) on :

I owned a 95 cobra (stock 240 hp) on the dyno it was 167 rwhp. [Confused]

I was pissed. A GT stock is 215 hp , which is 25 less than a cobra which im sure rwhp is around 142. http://www.mustangspecs.com/years/95.shtml

After full intake and exhaust upgrade I dyno'd 240 rwhp . After going with 306, afr's 165 and track heat I doyno'd 320 rwhp with shorties ,smog and carb legal (minus track heat) My 2cents after spending over 6 grand on motor and tranny I expected more [Frown]

[ January 25, 2012, 03:52 PM: Message edited by: Platinum Detail ]

Posted by 5.0 LsX (Member # 10017) on :

put an ls1 in it for not much more $$, 350rwhp stock & 28mpg

Posted by CornOil_&_Boost (Member # 5888) on :

quote:
Originally posted by 5.0 LsX:
put an ls1 in it for not much more $$, 350rwhp stock & 28mpg

never seen LS1 STOCK dyno 350RW without at least an intake and long tubes and a tune...

now an LS6...yes

[ January 25, 2012, 06:46 PM: Message edited by: CornOil_&_Boost ]

Fueled by Ford Mustang Owners
on CaliforniaFords.com