Late '80's/Early '90's 5.0

[turbojimmy]

Sure. The Callaway twin turbo corvette.

other than that, nothing.

I dunno if even the TT Vette hit 113 in 1987. The 1990 version approached it, but not the 1987 version.

Jim

 

[UNGN]

I dunno if even the TT Vette hit 113 in 1987. The 1990 version approached it, but not the 1987 version.

Jim

Also in 1987, most 1/4 mile tracks still had the speed traps extend 66 past the finish line, so 113 mph in the quarter in 1987 isn't the same as 113 mph today.

Almost all car magazines by the late 1980's used an instrumented wheel for 1/4 mile testing (only the real low budget ones actually used the traps) so magazine 1/4 mile times and actual results weren't the same, either.

 

[turbojimmy]

Also in 1987, most 1/4 mile tracks still had the speed traps extend 66 past the finish line, so 113 mph in the quarter in 1987 isn't the same as 113 mph today.

Almost all car magazines by the late 1980's used an instrumented wheel for 1/4 mile testing (only the real low budget ones actually used the traps) so magazine 1/4 mile times and actual results weren't the same, either.

That's interesting....so where are the traps today? Is 1987 113 faster or slower than 113 today?

Jim

 

[UNGN]

That's interesting....so where are the traps today? Is 1987 113 faster or slower than 113 today?

Jim

If you have a timeslip from 1987 that said 113 it would be slower than 113 today.

The traps used to be 66 feet before and after the finish line roughly giving you the average speed at the finish line.

Now they are 66 feet before the finish line and at the finish line, so the average speed is for roughly 33 feet before the finish line.

The change was made in the late 80's early 90's (depending on the track) because Top Fuel dragsters and funny cars were approaching 300 mph and the NHRA didn't like the idea of them still accelerating 66 feet past the finish line to hit the magic 300 mph number.

 

[ACLR8R]

Well I have owned an 88 IROC 5.7, and own a 93 notch 5.0, and My GN.

The IROC ran 14.7 stock, the mustang has run 14.5 @96 with a few bolt on's and crappy old tires ( horrible 2.36 60', 2.73 gears, and 140k on the clock). With DR's, and at least 3.08's it would go in the 13's.

The IROC was my first car and I thought it was fast, I beat quite a few 5.0's and even some LT1 cars.
The mustang is my daily driver, runs mid 14's and gets 21-23 mpg, starts up every time, and I dont have to mess with it, I still really dont lose that often on the street because most people dont know how to drive

I bought the Buick with some mods (exhaust, fuel system) and it ran in the mid 13's.

 

[03snake]

Back in the late 80s I had a couple of new stock Mustangs and a good running lx 5 speed will run high 13s @100. Then removing the belt and the filter they can run mid 13s @103.
I even had a brand new 88 lx with an automatic that ran 14.1 and everybody at the track was like including myself.
The best my friend could get from his AOD (same car as mine) was a 15.1.
I have also owned a couple of bone stock T types and the best I got was from my WE4 when it went 14.1 @98 and it was a non posi car.

 

[DaJoker]

Just for the info...a notchback mustang only weighed 30 lbs less then a hatchback!!! Past mustang owner my 86 GT with the suck azz stock heads went 14.7@92 and I would usually get beat by newer LX's, I'd launch em by a car or two and then they would run me down.

 

[turbofish38]

The '88-90 Iroc's weren't as quick as the '91-92 Z-28's.

We all thought the Irocs were an easy kill, until guys started showing up at the track with '91's and a few were cracking 13's stock.

They had such a reputation for being a slug and everyone by then was buying 5.0's, but the '91-92 Z's were surprisingly quick.

If I had the choice of a '91 Z or a '93 GT, racing for pinks, stock, my money would be on the Z.

I know of an bone stock 91 B4C Camaro that ran a 13.9 on a Friday night street drag. It was a 305/5 speed ex-Nebraska State Patrol. I guess the big 1LE brakes would have slowed it down a bit as this was an early production car with the stock 10.5 rotors on it. I would have bought it if it had the 1LEs on it only because of the times it turned that one night. We also had one of the very first 87 L98 Z/28s in the area that was a strong runner. It was the general managers demo and all though I didn't get a chance to put it on the strip I did use it for a couple of Solo2s that year. Everybody couldn't beleive that it was a 230HP car. I guess you cant beat the torque multiplication of a torque converter. I dont remember the LT1/T56 Camaros running as strong as this car did.