Who would win?

Sorry guys, I know this is not the Taurus section but I've asked this in there befor and nobody replied.

I have a 97 Taurus 3.0 Duratec DOHC 24V 200hp/200tq. I KNOW, IT'S A TAURUS SHUT UP, NOT FUNNY! Got a kid so it's much easier to get her out with the 4 doors than in a Stang, not to mention the FWD IN THE SNOW! Anyway a friend of mine with an 04 F150 4x4 auto 3.73 gears 5.4 extended cab wants to race me. Ofcourse my (cough, clear throat) T..T...Taurus is stock and he has a chip or reprogramed computer.

Yes, it's a Taurus but it has 200hp/200tq. I think it's pretty quick, but then again I have'nt had my 5.0 for 6 years now so even a Focus would be quick to me.

I went to DRAGTIMES.COM and for a 97 Taurus it said 1/4mile was 16.1 but I think that's for the base enginge 3.0 Vulcan engine with 160hp. I can't find a stock 1/4mile time for the 3.0 Duratec DOHC engine. The time I could find for the truck is 15.5. Like I said I think the 16.1 is for the 160hp 3.0 Taurus.

What do you guys think? Who would win? I know it sounds like an exciting race, a Taurus against a F150, lol.

QUITE LAUGHING, I CAN'T GET ANOTHER 5.0 UNTIL WE SELL OUR HOUSE NEXT YEAR. THANKS!

my guess would be the F.150, its probaly a drivers race though

Well I for one have owned the 97 taurus with the vulcan in it and it wasn't fast, although the one race it was in against my friends 94 del sol it won haha, my grandparents own the 99 taurus with the duratec. The duratec powered taurus is considerably more powerful than mine was. I would say that you could beat the truck.

Well I for one have owned the 97 taurus with the vulcan in it and it wasn't fast, although the one race it was in against my friends 94 del sol it won haha, my grandparents own the 99 taurus with the duratec. The duratec powered taurus is considerably more powerful than mine was. I would say that you could beat the truck.


Yeah, the Duratec is alot different from the Vulcan 160hp VS. 200hp. The Vulcan 3.0 can't even bark the tires while the Duratec spins them pretty good and holds you back in the seat pretty good for a V6.

I WOULD LOVE TO RACE A V6 MUSTANG OR A GRAND PRIX GT 3.8 (not the GTP supercharged 3.8 240hp). Or a V6 Camaro/Firebird. But anytime I try to do something with anybody they don't do anything. They probably figure it's a waste of time to race a non-SHO Taurus. Or they think I must have something else underhood, and they'd be embarassed to be beat by a Taurus. Especially with my kids Whinnie the Pooh sun shade in the window. That does add 30hp ya know.

Yeah, you should take em. The Car and Driver times for those trucks are really bad (not 15.5) if i remember right. That's a 300 horse motor and those gears are factory. I wouldn't think there would be any trouble in this race.

I know he has the power advantage but his truck also has the disadvantage of so much weight.

Man, I have the feeling that the f150 would just slaughter you. My mother drives a 03 expedition 5.4L 4wd, same engine as the f150 and the f150 is lighter too....and the expo will get up and go, and it is massive.

Dont race a truck, they haul alot of ass.

I don't know man. Yeah that engine pushes around 300hp but that truck weighs about 5,000 pounds. While the Taurus has 200hp, FWD (quick off the line), and weighs about 3300 pounds.

I think it would be a good match up.

let us know how it goes when you get to race him!

Tauri are my area of expertise ^_^

With about a $150 dollar investment your Duratech can push 230hp.

But a chipped F150? It will push 140mph.

Your car should be running 14s in 1/4 mile with proper use of overdrive.
A 1997 Duratech will not acclerate beyond 117mph without a modified PCM.

You could beat any stock automatic sohc v6 mustang but your not going to come close to the gran prix, they can kill a v8 sho.

Tauri are my area of expertise ^_^

With about a $150 dollar investment your Duratech can push 230hp.

But a chipped F150? It will push 140mph.

Your car should be running 14s in 1/4 mile with proper use of overdrive.
A 1997 Duratech will not acclerate beyond 117mph without a modified PCM.

You could beat any stock automatic sohc v6 mustang but your not going to come close to the gran prix, they can kill a v8 sho.


Even a 3.8 Grand Prix NON GTP (NO SUPERCHARGER). GTP=240hp, GT=200hp.

What is the $150 ivestment for 230hp?????????.....Chip??

there is no way a 160hp taurus is runing 16.1 its more in the 17's or 18's

that 16.1 had to have been for a Duratec, then you also have to know how he shifter the automatic (yes you can shift an auto) an incase he was lying aobut being stock.

I don't know man. I've never taken my 97 Duratec to the track but, I'm sure it's faster than 16.1. Have you ever driven a Duratec Taurus? It ALMOST feels like it's ALMOST as fast as my 89 5.0 auto when it was bone stock. Relax, I said ALMOST feels, I didn't say it was. The Duratec pulls pretty good.

My wife has had a 96 and our current 03 Taurus with the 160hp 3.0. NO, they're not the fastest things out there but, I'm sure they're not 17-18sec. cars. The 03 actually has alittle more off the line compared to the 96, that's because FOrd changed the intake on that engine. I saw a 77 T-Bird 302 run a 17sec. 1/4. Big boat, underpowered, probably about 150-160hp.

If anyone can help me find the 1/4mile time for a Taurus with 3.0 Duratec DOHC engine I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT!! THANK YOU!!

Oh yeah, I do know how to shift an auto. but, common man...it's a Taurus. They had enough problems with tranny's without racing them. It's not like the auto. in the 5.0 I had, sure their AOD's were weak also but, they were alot better than the Taurus tranny!

Stock Times: (All Automatics)
1996 Ford Taurus SHO
0-60mph:6.1
1/4 mile:15.2
1997 Ford Taurus Duratech
0-60mph:7.8
1/4 mile:15.9
1997 Ford Taurus Vulcan
0-60mph:10.0
1/4 mile:17.5
2000 Ford Mustang V6 SOHC
0-60mph:8.7
1/4 mile:16.6
2004 Ford F150 5.4
0-60mph:8.3
1/4 mile:15.8
1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
0-60mph:6.6
1/4 mile:14.9
1997 Pontiac Grand Prix SE
0-60mph:8.8
1/4 mile:16.8

Those should help you :-p

For a $150 you can build yourself a vastly superior intake via a dyi intake(+22-26hp) and get a K&N Cone Air filter(+3-8hp).
v8sho.com and taurus car club of america's websites should be able to help you.

Stock Times: (All Automatics)
1996 Ford Taurus SHO
0-60mph:6.1
1/4 mile:15.2
1997 Ford Taurus Duratech
0-60mph:7.8
1/4 mile:15.9
1997 Ford Taurus Vulcan
0-60mph:10.0
1/4 mile:17.5
2000 Ford Mustang V6 SOHC
0-60mph:8.7
1/4 mile:16.6
2004 Ford F150 5.4
0-60mph:8.3
1/4 mile:15.8
1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
0-60mph:6.6
1/4 mile:14.9
1997 Pontiac Grand Prix SE
0-60mph:8.8
1/4 mile:16.8

Those should help you :-p

For a $150 you can build yourself a vastly superior intake via a dyi intake(+22-26hp) and get a K&N Cone Air filter(+3-8hp).
v8sho.com and taurus car club of america's websites should be able to help you.
a 2000 v6 mustang auto should run low 16's with a average driver

I was digging around in my shop guide and found this funny:
2004 Ford Mustang Cobra SVT is on par with the average Ferrari.....just a little bit of fun information.

a 2000 v6 mustang auto should run low 16's with a average driver
The mechanics guide is rated with a 180lb dummy and a computer simulating the average person's movements.
sooooooooooooo..........................the average weight person with an average driving ability would run the quarter mile in 16.6 seconds.:wink:

a 96 SHO is NOT doing low 15's...more mid 15's trust me im around tauri all teh time my freind has a 97 SHO and my dad has a 99 Duratec, I had a 91 3.8.

the only ways you are gtting low 16's from is if you take out the spare, all un-needed items, and get a great track/launch and your a skinny dude.

Trust me I collect Tauri :-p, Also the 1996 SHO ran faster than the 97-99 SHO's due to its different PCM programming.

The mechanics guide is rated with a 180lb dummy and a computer simulating the average person's movements.
sooooooooooooo..........................the average weight person with an average driving ability would run the quarter mile in 16.6 seconds.:wink: a 180 lbs. person should only add like .15 to the 1/4 mile

You are only arguing a couple tenths anyway, besides this thread does not concern mustangs anyway.

Trust me I collect Tauri :-p, Also the 1996 SHO ran faster than the 97-99 SHO's due to its different PCM programming.

what is it w. ford fucking over pcm's?

98 zx2...15.6 good driver
03 zx2...16.2 good driver


the only change...03 is made to run richer and has SHIT for timing.

a 2000 v6 mustang auto should run low 16's with a average driver
that must be an experimental mustang with a SOHC v6 since ive never seen a 2000 with that engine.

It is an overhead I was reading out of the book.

It surprises me that even a baselevel mustang would have such an inferior engine.

that must be an experimental mustang with a SOHC v6 since ive never seen a 2000 with that engine.


I think he means the pushrod 3.8, ya know cause it has one cam. Sometimes people will say SOHC, which actually is a two cam engine (one single cam over each head) just like the 4.6 in the Mustang GT compared to the DOHC 4.6 in the Cobra which has two cams over each head.

Stock Times: (All Automatics)
1996 Ford Taurus SHO
0-60mph:6.1
1/4 mile:15.2
1997 Ford Taurus Duratech
0-60mph:7.8
1/4 mile:15.9
1997 Ford Taurus Vulcan
0-60mph:10.0
1/4 mile:17.5
2000 Ford Mustang V6 SOHC
0-60mph:8.7
1/4 mile:16.6
2004 Ford F150 5.4
0-60mph:8.3
1/4 mile:15.8
1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
0-60mph:6.6
1/4 mile:14.9
1997 Pontiac Grand Prix SE
0-60mph:8.8
1/4 mile:16.8

Those should help you :-p

For a $150 you can build yourself a vastly superior intake via a dyi intake(+22-26hp) and get a K&N Cone Air filter(+3-8hp).
v8sho.com and taurus car club of america's websites should be able to help you.



AWESOME!! Where did you find this info? THANKS!!

You are only arguing a couple tenths anyway, besides this thread does not concern mustangs anyway.


Sorry, as I said when I started this thread, I didn't get ANY feedback from the Taurus message board. And look at how much info we have recieved in here, two pages! On a Taurus! And it seems that most people in here had something to say about this issue, including you. And I thank you and everyone else for their help on this!!

I knew this car was quicker than what most of my friends were saying. High 15 for a NON-SHO Taurus, not bad. I think I'll do some weight saving stuff this weekend........Anyone know where I can find a lightweight(racing) kids car seat for a 4 year old.....and a helmet to.....and maybe 4 point harness also?

I wasn't really saying that to you, I was trying to get your thread back on track because it somehow got hijacked by yahoos arguing about V6 mustangs when its not relevant to your post at all.

AWESOME!! Where did you find this info? THANKS!! All the info except the F150 came out of my technician books and it came out of either the March 03 or April 04 Motor Trend Magazine.
Anyone know where I can find a lightweight(racing) kids car seat for a 4 year old.....and a helmet to.....and maybe 4 point harness also? Harley Davidson makes the helment for kids and fisher price makes fiber glass car seats.....

The overhead in the v6 is overhead valves (OHV). Not important, it was just bothering me. And the OHC's are not inferior in any way.

I consider OHV lesser engines not OHC.

I wasn't really saying that to you, I was trying to get your thread back on track because it somehow got hijacked by yahoos arguing about V6 mustangs when its not relevant to your post at all.


Oh, sorry man. Misunderstanding, I thought you were complaining because I asked for help about a Taurus in the Mustang forum. Sorry, and Thank You for trying to get it back on topic but, I liked hearing about the V6 Mustang stuff aswell. Since someone (can't remember who) typed that the Duratec would beat a V6 Mustang I've been trying to get them to race when I see one and they won't do anything yet. I'm sure I'll find someone who will, I'll let you guys know what happens. And I'll let you know what happens if the friend of mine with the F150 and I ever race, he lives in another town so it may be awhile.

THANKS GUYS

I consider OHV lesser engines not OHC.


So does that mean you feel that way about the 5.0 compared to the 4.6? If we are comparing stock vs. stock, the 5.0 gets my vote, untill 1999 when the 4.6 got 260hp. But then again, if I had to choose to buy a 92 5.0 Mustang or a 2000 4.6 Mustang, I'd buy the 92 5.0! Yes, I'll admitt the 2000 is a better car STOCK but, the 5.0 has MUCH MORE support from the aftermarket. Yes, the 4.6 is catching up but the 5.0 is also easier to work on.

I was not referring to any particualr engine. I have seen some simply beautiful OHV engines but I was stating in most cases if you were to line up an average 3.0L OHV V6 against an average 3.0L OHC V6. The OHC would show longer life, better output and less fuel consumption.

As far as the 5.0 vs 4.6, yes the 5.0 does have many more years ahead of it in the aftermarket parts scene than the 4.6 but that doesn't make it better, that just mean it is a favorite.

I was not referring to any particualr engine. I have seen some simply beautiful OHV engines but I was stating in most cases if you were to line up an average 3.0L OHV V6 against an average 3.0L OHC V6. The OHC would show longer life, better output and less fuel consumption.

As far as the 5.0 vs 4.6, yes the 5.0 does have many more years ahead of it in the aftermarket parts scene than the 4.6 but that doesn't make it better, that just mean it is a favorite.


About the 3.0's, I agree however, I'm not sure about the "less fuel consumption". My wife and I have had a 96 and our current 03 3.0 OHV Taurus and my 97 3.0 DOHC Taurus. Maybe it's just my heavy foot but even when I do try to go easy on it I think the OHV 3.0 does better on gas.

As for the 5.0 vs 4.6, I agree with your statement but, after 10 years the 4.6 should've had more than 260hp. Yes, it does now have 300hp but, they had to add an extra valve to do it (more moving parts). As I've said before on this, Ford could've used SVT or Ford Performance Parts on the 5.0/5.8 and easily had 300hp or more 10 years ago, who knows how much the good old pushrod could have now with the technology of today. I will give the 4.6 credit, I've read in Muscle Mustang and Fast Fords that the bottom end of the 4.6 is stronger than the bullet proof 5.0. I couldn't believe it when I read it but, if MM&FF's says it after their test then there must be some truth to it.

I don't hate the 4.6, I just don't see why Ford took a great engine that has proven itself since the 60's and threw it in the trash. GM didn't do that with their small block V8. I know the 350 is now actually a 347 or 348 and that it is a little different than before but it's still basically the same engine.

QUITE LAUGHING, I CAN'T GET ANOTHER 5.0 UNTIL WE SELL OUR HOUSE NEXT YEAR. THANKS!

I'm not laughing, I'm rolling my eyes.

I do, however, think that 15.5 is HIGHLY optimistic for a 4x4, extra cab, automatic F150, chip or not. Look at a Lightning; its a 4500lb 2WD shortbed regular cab 13-something second truck....with a blower and a boatload of torque.

About the 3.0's, I agree however, I'm not sure about the "less fuel consumption". My wife and I have had a 96 and our current 03 3.0 OHV Taurus and my 97 3.0 DOHC Taurus. Maybe it's just my heavy foot but even when I do try to go easy on it I think the OHV 3.0 does better on gas.

As for the 5.0 vs 4.6, I agree with your statement but, after 10 years the 4.6 should've had more than 260hp. Yes, it does now have 300hp but, they had to add an extra valve to do it (more moving parts). As I've said before on this, Ford could've used SVT or Ford Performance Parts on the 5.0/5.8 and easily had 300hp or more 10 years ago, who knows how much the good old pushrod could have now with the technology of today. I will give the 4.6 credit, I've read in Muscle Mustang and Fast Fords that the bottom end of the 4.6 is stronger than the bullet proof 5.0. I couldn't believe it when I read it but, if MM&FF's says it after their test then there must be some truth to it.

I don't hate the 4.6, I just don't see why Ford took a great engine that has proven itself since the 60's and threw it in the trash. GM didn't do that with their small block V8. I know the 350 is now actually a 347 or 348 and that it is a little different than before but it's still basically the same engine.

Well the 4.6 is apparently cheaper to make and it burns cleaner for emissions purposes. There is no doubt that the 5.0 can make more than 260 hp but it would make the EPA sick and ford,not the customer, would be taxed. I do agree that the first version of the 4.6 was crap. As for GM... their new motors are nothing like the old ones. Sure they are pushrod but thats about where the similarities end. And just since you mentioned it the LS1's were 346ci.

As for GM... their new motors are nothing like the old ones. Sure they are pushrod but thats about where the similarities end.

Which is proof that this:

Well the 4.6 is apparently cheaper to make and it burns cleaner for emissions purposes. There is no doubt that the 5.0 can make more than 260 hp but it would make the EPA sick and ford,not the customer, would be taxed.

......very likely is not true. Ford has a habit of building things that are the easiest to sell, but aren't necessarily the best. If they can save one red cent on something by making it adequate instead of superior, they will. It would not have been that hard to modify the 302 design into a skirted-block OHC if they wanted.

Well the 4.6 is apparently cheaper to make and it burns cleaner for emissions purposes. There is no doubt that the 5.0 can make more than 260 hp but it would make the EPA sick and ford,not the customer, would be taxed. I do agree that the first version of the 4.6 was crap. As for GM... their new motors are nothing like the old ones. Sure they are pushrod but thats about where the similarities end. And just since you mentioned it the LS1's were 346ci.


I'm not doubting you but, if the 4.6 is cheaper to make than why does a complete 4.6 cost SOOOO much more than a complete 5.0 (factory Ford engines)?

Ford could've made the 5.0 pass EPA with no problem and still been able to get plenty of power out of it. Like Speedfreak (I think it was him) said Ford sometimes just wants to do what will sell and save Ford $$ even if it's not the best.

Yeah, I know the LS1 is different from the old 350. But being a Ford guy I just don't know how different they are. But atleast it's still a pushrod and it's still basically the same concept. Thank You for letting me know the correct C.I.D. Doesn't Chevy make a 327 today? It's also different from the old 327.