|
|
92 Thunderbird SC or a 92 Thunderbird with 5.0L?Scott 02 01-29-2003, 10:51 AM Was thinking about one of the two. From experience, which one of the two is got the most aceleration power and has the best reliability? TerminalVelocity 01-29-2003, 06:34 PM sc has a lil more hp than the 5.0, a lil less torque, a T-5 5 speed, and 3.73 gears The 3.8 v6 the SC uses has bad head gaskets, alot of times, especally with the SC they shread. The 5.0 is much easier to mod though, for cheep stuff anyway Exaust and intake will bump the 5.0 to around 240hp and 310 torque put that same t-5 and 3.73's onto the 5.0 and youll be in the mid 14's 93tbird 03-15-2003, 03:53 PM sc has more torque 1993 sc = 315 ft/lb, 210hp 1993 5.0 = 275 ft/lb, 200hp 450HPviper 03-17-2003, 09:38 AM If you can, get the 5.0. I know that you want a V-8. So don't go with the SC. thunderbird muscle 02-02-2004, 01:07 AM 5.0 is one of the cheapest motors ever produced to build up kingdavid 10-22-2008, 12:56 AM I have a 5.0 w/ flowmasters & no cats, one sweet ride it is bennylw 10-27-2008, 02:36 PM I just bought a -92 V8 and I donīt care if the SC has a bit more power - nothing sounds like a V8. I live in Sweden and was looking for a V8-car for the winter so my wife and I donīt fight for the Buick RMW -95 when going in different directions :) The tbird rides smoothly and is quick enough. I have the LT1 engine on the Buick and have put the K&N FIPK gen II which gives better sound and - they say - a bump in hp/torque. Is there similar gains with a CAI on the 5.0 HO engine in the tbird? V8 canīt be wrong! Benny in a cold autumn Sweden JR Tigerstar 10-28-2008, 09:03 AM Thread started 01-29-2003 & Scott 02 is now Banned. Let the thread die. vBulletin®, Copyright ©2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2009
|