 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / May 20052004 GT performance options
what the best way to get more performance from a 2004 GT without breaking the bank? - chip? - exhaust? - cold air intake? - nitrous? - super charger? MG >what the best way to get more performance from a 2004 GT without breaking >the bank? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >MG ya forgot TRADE IN lmfao u go girl hurc ast Hey Omar, What value do you add to this news group. I've read your blathering commentary, which is senseless, in many posts. Do you really think that anyone cares about your opinion? Last time I looked up IDIOT and DOLT in the dictionary your name came up. If you really know something about cars or the English language it would be evident. Go back to the rock from under which you came. MG id·i·ot n. 1.. A foolish or stupid person. OMARSIMMS25793 2.. A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. OMARSIMMS25793 dolt n. A stupid person; a dunce. OMARSIMMS25793 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Middle English dulte, from past participle of dullen, to dull, from dul, dull. See dull.] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- doltish adj. doltish·ly adv. doltish·ness n. >>what the best way to get more performance from a 2004 GT without breaking >>the bank? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > hurc ast > Hey Omar, > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > doltish·ly adv. > doltish·ness n. You forgot one: Idiot: One who feeds trolls. Why you morons reply to this guy is beyond me and makes you no better than her. Jeff --------- 01 GT MAC CAI Pro 5.0 Shifter UPR fuel door MAC White Face Gauges Magnapacks Tokico Shock/Struts Eibach Pro springs MM CC Plates Bang for the buck.in this order gears 410s or 373s.. you'll need a chip or speedcal to adjust your speedo. chip - decent gains but nothing staggering. Nitrous - relatively cheap but there are major tuning issues involved S/C-Turbo - getting expensive, but along with a good dyno tune will give dependable everyday driving results... this is also where a better exhaust will help, 'specially a hiflow catted X pipe (or H pipe) CAI - underdrive pulleys - not worth the money..I've tried them and really wasn't impressed.. they look pretty tho.. spend the money on upgraded shocks & struts or upper & lower control arms... . Really take a look at where you want to end up.. no point in buying things that you'll end up removing in a year or 2. e.g. underdrive pulleys, CAI gotta come off to put an S/C on..so theres $600 cdn plus install if needed. For my money, I'd start with gears.  SignatureJafo '02 GT Black Not eggzackly stock. > what the best way to get more performance from a 2004 GT without breaking > the bank? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > MG I agree for the most part with what he said, but not the order. Gears are probably best bang for buck if you get a good deal on 'em (& no tune required.. very safe). Nitrous probably comes next.... given your motor is in decent condition & you're not getting greedy with the HP nozzle (ie: run a mild 75 shot instead of a 150 shot). Nitrous will give you gobs of torque, but yes..you do refill the bottle. Retarding the timing even with a 75 shot may be required. A chip is more effective than a CAI, but not by much honestly.. and they are very expensive. If the 04 GT was mine & had a manual tranny.. I'd get 3.73 gears, full-length subframe connectors, 75 shot Zex nitrous w/ bottle heater, Borla loudmouth catback, H-pipe w/ 2 high-flow cats, Steeda timing adjuster (if required to change timing)... that'd put me at at least (at flywheel) 345hp & 390ft-lbs of torque. Of course, it's going to cost a hefty sum too ;). And then you've got the problem of keeping your lead foot off the pedal... but it'd make for a helluva Mustang! :) HTH -Mike -- Melt away the Cellulite with Cellulean! http://www.MeltAwayCellulite.com/ > Bang for the buck.in this order > gears 410s or 373s.. you'll need a chip or speedcal to adjust your speedo. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > > > MG Thanks memset and Jafo. The gears make sense but it does take away some of the top-end. My old 5.0 had upgrades to gears, cold-air, throttle body, cam, headers, exhaust, and even upgraded plugs and wires but one of my mechanic friends thinks that I should just wait until parts wear out and need replaced before replacing them (that's one of the reasons I still drive a Volvo with >250,000 miles - winter beater). So, taking that into consideration I'm looking for improvements that aren't radical but also not throw-away. Car had 3,000 mi. The car has a manual tranny but one thing I don't like about it is that 5th gear is OD. BTW. Does anyone make an iPod adapter that interfaces with a the factory Mach (6 CD) radio? Thanks again. MG >I agree for the most part with what he said, but not the order. > [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] >> > >> > MG I added a K & N air filter, Maganaflow Cat back, and a Accufab Plenum with 70MM throttle body to my 2002 GT. Those mods have me at 243 rwhp / 285 rwtq. Martin I added a K & N air filter, Maganaflow Cat back, and a Accufab Plenum with 70MM throttle body to my 2002 GT. Those mods have me at 243 rwhp / 285 rwtq. Martin > Thanks memset and Jafo. > > The gears make sense but it does take away some of the top-end. Can someone confirm that. I thought that was the case but I was able to reach 220 kmh @5000 rpm in OD with 4:10's on my '94 GT before calling it quits. That works out to about 138 mph. SignatureRichard '94 GT 'vert Under Drive Pulleys Transgo HD2 Reprogramming Kit High Stall Torque Converter 4:10 Gears Gripp Sub Frame Connectors (welded) FRPP Aluminum Drive shaft FRPP M5400-A Suspension Laser Red >> Thanks memset and Jafo. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >reach 220 kmh @5000 rpm in OD with 4:10's on my '94 GT before calling it >quits. That works out to about 138 mph. What was the 220kmh reading from ? the speedo ? At that speed, there usually is quite a bit of error in the reading. Best is to measure with a gps. > >> Thanks memset and Jafo. > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > usually is quite a bit of error in the reading. Best is to measure > with a gps. That was off the speedo. However, my conversion table for the 94 - 95 with AODE shows that at 5000 rpm with the 4:10 gears converts to 138 mph. I have an electronic recalibration device to correct the speedo for the gear change. GPS would have been better but I'd guess that the figures are fairly accurate. SignatureRichard '94 GT 'vert Under Drive Pulleys Transgo HD2 Reprogramming Kit High Stall Torque Converter 4:10 Gears Gripp Sub Frame Connectors (welded) FRPP Aluminum Drive shaft FRPP M5400-A Suspension Laser Red >> >> Thanks memset and Jafo. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >change. GPS would have been better but I'd guess that the figures are fairly >accurate. So, you can reach the same top speed as before the gear change ? There are so many factors involved in comparing. In what gear did you do this ? I seem to recall (but not sure) that the 94/95 reached their topspeed in 4th gear. Other things to be aware of are : same road same direction, same wind, same temperature.. Also, are you sure you are not hitting the limiter ? I think some of these cars were limited to the speed the tires could handle. (or below it even). That would explain a lot. I don't know if it's the same top speed or not. Didn't have an opportunity to try before. One just can't run to 130+ anytime anywhere. There is no speed limiter on the GT that I'm aware of. SignatureRichard '94 GT 'vert Under Drive Pulleys Transgo HD2 Reprogramming Kit High Stall Torque Converter 4:10 Gears Gripp Sub Frame Connectors (welded) FRPP Aluminum Drive shaft FRPP M5400-A Suspension Laser Red > So, you can reach the same top speed as before the gear change ? > There are so many factors involved in comparing. In what gear did you [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > these cars were limited to the speed the tires could handle. (or below > it even). That would explain a lot. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.