New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

All the news that's fit to shift.
eggwich delfiero
Senior Standardshifter
Posts: 896
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:31 pm
Cars: Mustang GT
Location: San Francisco

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by eggwich delfiero »

Okay, I'm back to play defense! :lol:

If we're talking early 90s performance, and we're not talking Camaro/Corvette, what comes close to the 5.0s performance at its price point? At any price point? 225 HP doesn't sound like much now that we have 500 HP sedans, but we're talking early 90s here. M3? Ferrari 348? Audi anything? Mustang wins. (until the first turn, lolzers) I'm saying a car is judged by its peers, and in the early 90s, after the 5.0 went EFI, it was a beast. Sure, by 98, by today, it doesn't have much value beyond nostalgia unless it's heavily modified, and even then, it's pretty much on its way out. But to say it needed more power from the factory, I just can't understand that in the context of the times. It's like saying the CTS-V is cool, but they should've went for 650 HP.

And whoever said that 12 second Mustang run took forever, no joke! Seemed like fifteen seconds. That was the first stock engine vid I could find, and even that's a bit of a cheater, as everything else on that car has been modded to hell to get it into the 12s.
User avatar
theholycow
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 16021
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:36 pm
Cars: '80 Buick LeSabre 4.1 5MT
Location: Glocester, RI
Contact:

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by theholycow »

eggwich delfiero wrote:The 5.0 was putting out 225/245 in 1990
You have to put that into context, too. In 1990, that was absolutely HUGE. 1990 was at the tail end of a time when emissions requirements were really crippling the hell out of everything. Whether it was a huge V8 or a moderate-displacement turbo engine, it couldn't make much power at all. The same V8s that might have made 300hp in 1968 made 150hp in 1988, despite technology improvements. I think that is called "emissions era", though "emissions error" might be more accurate.

So, what were the numbers for a 1990 Viggen, or whatever Saab had in the US that was most similar in 1990?
1980 Buick LeSabre 4.1L 5MT

Put your car in your sig!

Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms: meta-sig
watkins wrote:Humans have rear-biased AWD. Cows have 4WD
watkins
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 15880
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:42 am
Cars: '08 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon
Location: Salem, MA

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by watkins »

1990 SPG: 175hp, 195 tq. Not shabby at all for a four cylinder 20 years ago

For a more direct comparison with a Viggen, the '99 Mustang GT had 260hp
eggwich delfiero
Senior Standardshifter
Posts: 896
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:31 pm
Cars: Mustang GT
Location: San Francisco

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by eggwich delfiero »

watkins wrote:1990 SPG: 175hp, 195 tq. Not shabby at all for a four cylinder 20 years ago

For a more direct comparison with a Viggen, the '99 Mustang GT had 260hp
175/195 is very respectable for any car in 1990.
And 260 HP is still respectable for most any car today.
These comparisons aren't really all that fair, not that fair is important, but still.... A 99' Mustang is at 260 and is a good engine to improve/build upon. It's ability to be improved is also why it's so cheap (guessing 24K?)(ability to be improved is a nice way of saying not-so strong internals/no forced induction, etc.). A Viggen engine is a smaller engine already decked out with trick parts and forced induction. Not that that's bad in any way, it's just a specialized build. But you have to pay for those goodies too (around 35K?). Because besides that, the quality of the interior/other parts is pretty much the same.

(Yes, that last line is a joke. We are comparing a luxury sedan and a ponycar, I know the pony is outclassed :D)
94Corolla5Speed
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 6927
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:51 pm
Cars: 1994 Corolla, 1990 Miata
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by 94Corolla5Speed »

Mustang sounds better than a Viggen.


/thread.
watkins
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 15880
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:42 am
Cars: '08 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon
Location: Salem, MA

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by watkins »

eggwich delfiero wrote: These comparisons aren't really all that fair, not that fair is important, but still.... A 99' Mustang is at 260 and is a good engine to improve/build upon. It's ability to be improved is also why it's so cheap (guessing 24K?)(ability to be improved is a nice way of saying not-so strong internals/no forced induction, etc.). A Viggen engine is a smaller engine already decked out with trick parts and forced induction.
As much as I dislike the vast majority of Mustangs, thats the one thing I really have to respect them for. There is so much power potential and so many ways to bring it out. A Mustang engine and its aftermarket is much like a big bucket of LEGO bricks. You can make whatever you want.

Of course to a lesser extent the same is true for a Saab engine. Its relatively easy to bring power figures to around 300/300 with the surprisingly large aftermarket. The problem is that going much above that point requires major engine work. 500+ hp Saabs of a similar vintage as mine arent entirely unheard of though.

Here is Nick Taliaferro's (top Saab aftermarket part designer/fabricator in the US) drag car. I believe his E85 street Viggen has more power (around 425-450 these days)
watkins
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 15880
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:42 am
Cars: '08 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon
Location: Salem, MA

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by watkins »

94Corolla5Speed wrote:Mustang sounds better than a Viggen.
Youve probably never heard a Viggen, have you? Though factory exhaust is quite quiet, aftermarket can get a nice rumble. My intentional exhaust leak makes my car burble pretty well. I really should re-tighten the clamp or just get a real exhaust on the car.

Or maybe its because I dont really like the exhaust note of most Mustangs. More of a GM guy for engine sounds.
scionkid
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 1:47 am
Cars: 04 xB
Location: Anaheim, CA
Contact:

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by scionkid »

theholycow wrote:
eggwich delfiero wrote:The 5.0 was putting out 225/245 in 1990
You have to put that into context, too. In 1990, that was absolutely HUGE. 1990 was at the tail end of a time when emissions requirements were really crippling the hell out of everything. Whether it was a huge V8 or a moderate-displacement turbo engine, it couldn't make much power at all. The same V8s that might have made 300hp in 1968 made 150hp in 1988, despite technology improvements. I think that is called "emissions era", though "emissions error" might be more accurate.
HUGE? Those crazy Hondas were making 270hp and 210 lb-ft of torque with a 3.0L V6 (almost 2x of what the Taurus V6 made), pushing around an aluminum chassis, for around $48k back then. I applaud Ford's effort for improving their products over the years. They are putting a smaller displacement, more powerful V6 in the Mustang now. But that wasn't huge power for a 5.0 V8.
User avatar
theholycow
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 16021
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:36 pm
Cars: '80 Buick LeSabre 4.1 5MT
Location: Glocester, RI
Contact:

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by theholycow »

scionkid wrote:HUGE? Those crazy Hondas were making 270hp and 210 lb-ft of torque with a 3.0L V6 (almost 2x of what the Taurus V6 made), pushing around an aluminum chassis, for around $48k back then.
I'm not familiar with a 1988 Honda that made that much power. What model was it?

Anyway, the $12,745 Mustang was within reach of the average Joe, a $48,000 anything was not. Might as well be talking about Ferraris and Lamborghinis. For $48k, you could buy FOUR new Mustang GTs in 1988.
http://www.mustanggt.org/88gt.htm
1980 Buick LeSabre 4.1L 5MT

Put your car in your sig!

Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms: meta-sig
watkins wrote:Humans have rear-biased AWD. Cows have 4WD
scionkid
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 1:47 am
Cars: 04 xB
Location: Anaheim, CA
Contact:

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by scionkid »

1990 Honda NSX (Acura in the US)

I agree that it was expensive. Those titanium connecting rods alone probably cost as much as a Mustang. But no matter which way you say it, 5.0 V8 making 225 hp was not huge. It was just cost effective as it was something they had been building for ages. It would have been great for a Miata size car. Not a Mustang with it's relatively huge engine bay. More could have been done if Ford wanted to do it. Honda did.
User avatar
RITmusic2k
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 2078
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:32 pm
Cars: 2004 BMW 330i ZHP
Location: Anaheim, CA
Contact:

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by RITmusic2k »

Man, I wouldn't have waited so long to post in this thread had I known it was gonna be a Viggen / Mustang pissing match!! So! Um...

I don't have anything to contribute :?

I think the best car to come out of Ford's stable in 1990 was the Taurus SHO. 220hp/200tq from a 3.0 six that redlined at 7000rpm. It did it without variable valve timing, too. The reason I stepped into a Viggen was because I felt it was the spiritual successor to my SHO: Rare version of a company's bread-and-butter car, super special engine, manual transmission only, and very under the radar.
watkins
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 15880
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:42 am
Cars: '08 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon
Location: Salem, MA

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by watkins »

Yet. I hope.
94Corolla5Speed
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 6927
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:51 pm
Cars: 1994 Corolla, 1990 Miata
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by 94Corolla5Speed »

RITmusic2k wrote:The reason I stepped into a Viggen was because I felt it was the spiritual successor to my SHO: Rare version of a company's bread-and-butter car, super special engine, manual transmission only, and very under the radar.
SHO's came in automatic also.
watkins
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 15880
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:42 am
Cars: '08 Saab 9-5 Aero wagon
Location: Salem, MA

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by watkins »

Manual only = upgrade
User avatar
RITmusic2k
Master Standardshifter
Posts: 2078
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:32 pm
Cars: 2004 BMW 330i ZHP
Location: Anaheim, CA
Contact:

Re: New Musclestang Motor & Golf MkVI

Post by RITmusic2k »

94Corolla5Speed wrote:
RITmusic2k wrote:The reason I stepped into a Viggen was because I felt it was the spiritual successor to my SHO: Rare version of a company's bread-and-butter car, super special engine, manual transmission only, and very under the radar.
SHO's came in automatic also.
Eventually. But still.

Never correct a former SHO-owner :twisted:

When the SHO was first offered in 1989, it was manual-only. Not until 1993 did they offer an auto. So, all the stuff I said above was more in the spirit of what each company did when they released the car. I'm sure if the OG9-3 wasn't at the end of its life cycle at the time, they'd eventually have come out with an automatic Viggen as well :-/
Post Reply