stats on 88-89 HO 5.0

How much HP did these bad boys come stock with??. My brothers friend just got an 88-89 high output 5.0 and he claims 230HP with Flowmaster duals for mods

yeah they cam stock with 225 and 300ft/lbs. so thats a resinabol gess of power.

I heard those same numbers, but I've heard a rumor about the 88-93 5.0s. I've heard that the real horsepower ratings were higher and Ford didn't want the car to look bad to teenager's parents getting the car for their kid. I think 5.0 magazine did a story on this a long time ago and said the real HP ratings are somewhere around 260-280. Has anybody else heard anything about this, or am I the only one?

i do know that they used to under-rate the hp for insurrance reasons but i dont know if they still do and if so what the actual hp is .

they say the 88' w/o mass air make 225 factory and the '89 to '95 comes with 220 but it is much cheaper to build because you don't have to convert it to mass air first. California was the only place you could get an '88 with mass air.

A mass air conversion kit is $550.

I heard those same numbers, but I've heard a rumor about the 88-93 5.0s. I've heard that the real horsepower ratings were higher and Ford didn't want the car to look bad to teenager's parents getting the car for their kid. I think 5.0 magazine did a story on this a long time ago and said the real HP ratings are somewhere around 260-280. Has anybody else heard anything about this, or am I the only one?

I'm 99% sure that ford did underrate these cars for insurance reasons. The 5.0L real #'s are probably a little shy of 300 HP. If not it could be a RWHP figure. Dodge underrated high performance engines in the 60's w/ the hemi and 440. The hemi was rated at 425 HP but was more around 500. Either way it helps me w/ insurance, although it is at $200 a month...

A mass air conversion kit is $550.
Oh ok thanks.....











Anyone know where this came from?

they say the 88' w/o mass air make 225 factory and the '89 to '95 comes with 220 but it is much cheaper to build because you don't have to convert it to mass air first. California was the only place you could get an '88 with mass air.
I was replying to this on how much money it would be to start off the bigger upgrades with the 88.

I heard those same numbers, but I've heard a rumor about the 88-93 5.0s. I've heard that the real horsepower ratings were higher and Ford didn't want the car to look bad to teenager's parents getting the car for their kid. I think 5.0 magazine did a story on this a long time ago and said the real HP ratings are somewhere around 260-280. Has anybody else heard anything about this, or am I the only one?
Not true! You run any fox of those years on a dyno and your see somewhere around 180-190 RWHP. Who ever said they were under rated and were actually putting out 260-280, is miss-informed!

i heard the 87 mustang 5.0 has around 225- 250 Hp. Is it true?

Not true! You run any fox of those years on a dyno and your see somewhere around 180-190 RWHP. Who ever said they were under rated and were actually putting out 260-280, is miss-informed!

yes, especially considering that Ford rates their car's horsepower at the transmission tailshaft as opposed to the crank... at least i think that's what i heard =P

Well, somebody is going to have to look this up because I heard 5.0 magazine tested an early 90s LX on a dyno and its HP figures were well above 180-190 and even above their 225 rating. Like I said, I heard it was above 250. Seems they were doing a story on what we're debating right now.

Also, I still find it very, very, very hard to belive the 5.0 only has 180-190 at the wheels. My mom's Altima is putting 175 to the wheels, so why can't my mom's car go toe to toe with my dad's 5.0?

torque

torque? :P

Well, somebody is going to have to look this up because I heard 5.0 magazine tested an early 90s LX on a dyno and its HP figures were well above 180-190 and even above their 225 rating. Like I said, I heard it was above 250. Seems they were doing a story on what we're debating right now.

Also, I still find it very, very, very hard to belive the 5.0 only has 180-190 at the wheels. My mom's Altima is putting 175 to the wheels, so why can't my mom's car go toe to toe with my dad's 5.0?
Look it up, I'm telling you straight fact! 87-92 5.0 mustang were rated at 225hp with 300 ft-lbs of torque.

Take 225 Bhp and subtract 15-20% for frictional loss through the drivetrain, you get 191-180 RWHP, depending on transmission choice.

I can tell you for a fact, that there is NO STOCK 5.0 putting down 250 hp, straight from the factory.

Id just assume HiFlow knows his stuff (he usually does) and drop the thread.

Id just assume HiFlow knows his stuff (he usually does) and drop the thread.

I'll drop the thread so nothing gets out of hand here, but I won't belive it until I get my car on a dyno and see it. As soon as I find a dyno in my area, I'll let everybody know what it showed.

torque? :P

Damn computer was spazing this morning lol.

I'll drop the thread so nothing gets out of hand here, but I won't belive it until I get my car on a dyno and see it. As soon as I find a dyno in my area, I'll let everybody know what it showed.
:newbie:...:twak:

What makes me a newbie?

if you believe you have 250 rwhp or even 250 hp anywhere in the car. stock of course.i d have to see that to believe it .

Look it up, I'm telling you straight fact! 87-92 5.0 mustang were rated at 225hp with 300 ft-lbs of torque.

Take 225 Bhp and subtract 15-20% for frictional loss through the drivetrain, you get 191-180 RWHP, depending on transmission choice.

I can tell you for a fact, that there is NO STOCK 5.0 putting down 250 hp, straight from the factory.


Shut up Craig! you have no clue what you talking about! :evillol:

The only ones I've seen any proof of underrating is the 94-95 Cobra's and the Terminator Cobra's.

Many SN95 5.0 Snakes have dyno'd 235-245 at the wheels bone stock. Ford really expected us to believe better heads+better intake=25 hp and no torque gain? riiight..

For an 88-earlier, I'd personally spend that 550 on a 650 CFM Carb and a performer RPM intake....

351WStang.... That's now officially my favorite one line reply. Torque.

BTW HiFlow: Refer to #2 in GTStang's Sig....

this thread rules! great for laughs! hiflow, where did you find that newbie smilie?

if you believe you have 250 rwhp or even 250 hp anywhere in the car. stock of course.i d have to see that to believe it .
Exactly my point!