How much HP does a stock 94 GT have - Ford Mustang Forum

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003 Thread Starter
PONY Member
4.6L Member
 
Kevin62773's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 628
 
Send a message via Yahoo to Kevin62773
How much HP does a stock 94 GT have

???


**No advertising in signatures, doing so will result in an infraction**
Kevin62773 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
PONY Member
 
Quick4.6's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 845
 
215... its essentially the same as the 96-98 GTs.


SOLD: PI Headed '98 GT - 248rwhp/306rwtq - 13.88@101.9 (2.0 60ft 3300+ DA)

'11 TDI Sportwagen - 50 mpg Daily Driver - Not Quick.
Quick4.6 is offline  
post #3 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
Banned
 
blackfang's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 918
 
Send a message via AIM to blackfang Send a message via Yahoo to blackfang
94-97 GT had 215, the 98 GT had 225. I guess they underrated the 94-95 GT being the Cobra was 240. I duon't know for sure, that's what i have heard.
blackfang is offline  
post #4 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
PONY Member
 
Quick4.6's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 845
 
94-98's all essentially run the same E/Ts stock. Although the power curve on the 94-95s is better than the 96-98s. The 94/95 Cobras are weak, thanks to a crappy stock computer. An A9L computer retrofit on a 94/95 Cobra works wonders.

SOLD: PI Headed '98 GT - 248rwhp/306rwtq - 13.88@101.9 (2.0 60ft 3300+ DA)

'11 TDI Sportwagen - 50 mpg Daily Driver - Not Quick.
Quick4.6 is offline  
post #5 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
spyder's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 1,049
 
Send a message via AIM to spyder
Quote:
An A9L computer retrofit on a 94/95 Cobra works wonders.
AMEN! although theres rumors that the 94/95 gt's had 225...i dont want to get into it but a stock 95 gt would take a stock 96 gt. 96-98 4.6 gt's were dogs/are dogs unless you do a head swap.

-Robert


DEAD: 1994 GT (a pine tree fell on it during a windstorm...great huh)

NEW: 1995 GT Convertible, Triple Black; receiving all the goodies from the 1994 gt and some more stuff too
spyder is offline  
post #6 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
PONY Member
 
Quick4.6's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 845
 
from my experience (owning both) the 94-98s all seem to run similar E/Ts. They're all essentially 14 second cars stock. Some have gone high 14s, others have gone low 14s. Although I'll give the 5.0 SN95s a tenth or two advantage due to their power curve. Either way all 94-98 GTs were "dogs" in that aspect bone stock. The were all fairly heavy and made lackluster power. 14 second E/Ts are respectable, but with todays standards thats nothing to fear.

SOLD: PI Headed '98 GT - 248rwhp/306rwtq - 13.88@101.9 (2.0 60ft 3300+ DA)

'11 TDI Sportwagen - 50 mpg Daily Driver - Not Quick.
Quick4.6 is offline  
post #7 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
PONY Member
4.6L Member
 
97Red248A's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Location: Asheville
Posts: 419
 
From the knowlege I've gained from this wonderful site, here's my 2 cents. The 5.0s had lower peak power curves than the modulars giving an advantage off the line. But the cammed GTs would then catch up as they got higher up in gear. So my conclusion is the entire race would be a back and forth run ending virtually simultanously.

Those 5.0 guys will never accept that fact though, never.
97Red248A is offline  
post #8 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
GT Member
5.0L Member
 
spyder's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 1,049
 
Send a message via AIM to spyder
Quote:
Those 5.0 guys will never accept that fact though, never.
i know....i have a 5.0 too... ?

but thats a general statement. a 5.0 can easily have awesome top end with a good intake. *cough* trick flow *cough*... i love my huge valves cant wait for cam!

but in stock form what you said is right, most of us know that.

-Robert


DEAD: 1994 GT (a pine tree fell on it during a windstorm...great huh)

NEW: 1995 GT Convertible, Triple Black; receiving all the goodies from the 1994 gt and some more stuff too
spyder is offline  
post #9 of 10 (permalink) Old 04-22-2003
PONY Member
 
Quick4.6's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 845
 
i believe the 94/95s have a better top end then the 96-98s. The 5.0 is a big time over square engine (4inch bore and 3 inch stroke.) That makes for a hell of a revver, the only reason it isn't one is because of the limits of the stock cam, E7TEs, and the long runner intake. Thats how the 5.0 managed to have a decent top end, but make torque at the same time.

I don't know what they were thinking when they designed the 4.6 A square engine with overhead cams. The 96-98s make peak power somewhere in the mid 4's. My 5.0 pulled harder in the top end then my 98 did with stock heads.

Us 4.6 GT guys have managed to turn some decent e/ts though

SOLD: PI Headed '98 GT - 248rwhp/306rwtq - 13.88@101.9 (2.0 60ft 3300+ DA)

'11 TDI Sportwagen - 50 mpg Daily Driver - Not Quick.
Quick4.6 is offline  
PONY Member
 
BigAlMo's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: Manassas
Posts: 352
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Quick4.6
94-98's all essentially run the same E/Ts stock. Although the power curve on the 94-95s is better than the 96-98s. The 94/95 Cobras are weak, thanks to a crappy stock computer. An A9L computer retrofit on a 94/95 Cobra works wonders.
I have heard of that before. I aslo had A9L computer in my 90 GT... I recall seeing somewhere that my 90, running the specs through Ford was rated 240HP stock (A9L). Anyone else heard of this??

Maybe it was a typo on the Web..

www.allenmorrison.net/mods.htm
BigAlMo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome