TMSBrad

From Mustang & Fords magazine:

1974-1978
302 2V: 17.7 @ 78.2

Zastava_101

From MuscleCarClub.com

1974
Engines: 2.3 liter I4 102 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 2.8 liter V6 119 bhp @ 5200 rpm.
Performance: 2.8 V6/119: 0-60 in 13.8 seconds, 1/4 mile in 19.4 seconds @ 70.5 mph.

1975
Engines: 2.3 liter I4 102 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 2.8 liter V6 119 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 302 V8 134 bhp @ 3600 rpm, 247 lb-ft @ 1800.
Performance: 302 V8: 0-60 in 10.5 seconds, 1/4 mile in 17.9 seconds @ 77 mph.

1976
Engines: 2.3 liter I4 102 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 2.8 liter V6 119 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 302 V8 134 bhp @ 3600 rpm, 247 lb-ft @ 1800.
Performance: 302 V8: 0-60 in 10.5 seconds, 1/4 mile in 17.9 seconds @ 77 mph.

1977
Engines: 2.3 liter I4 102 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 2.8 liter V6 119 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 302 V8 134 bhp @ 3600 rpm, 247 lb-ft @ 1800.
Performance: .

1978
Egines: 2.3 liter I4 102 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 2.8 liter V6 119 bhp @ 5200 rpm. 302 V8 134 bhp @ 3600 rpm, 247 lb-ft @ 1800.
Performance: 302 V8: 0-60 in 11.2 seconds, 1/4 mile in 16.59 seconds @ 82.41 mph.

05Mustangfan

StangII

And your point is?

TMSBrad

Certainly slow by today's standards, but I'm sure they were quicker than the industry average in the late 1970s.

StangII

Name any american regular production car from that era that was quick by todays standards? Still they were weaker than the arch rival z28s. The 350s put out in the range of 165 to 185 hp and the torque numbers were higher to for obvious reasons. Same technology bigger engine....... ie no replacement for displacement.

Emissions control equipment is light years ahead of where they were in the 70s. Unfortunately the IIs were sorta the laboratory for the weird horrific experiments that was forced upon us by the gas shortage. Such as thermacters (sp), a pitiful excuse for a catalytic convertor that made it hiss under full throttle and a nightmare of platic tubing plumbed to who knows where. So when you rev up your high horsepower 50 state legal machines remember to salute your favorite punching bag and lab rat....the Mustang II (removes soap box and rinses BS off the floor with water hose).

85CapriGS

My 76 Cobra II that I had ran 10.30 in the 1/8 th when I had it back in 89. That was with 2bbl carb, single track rear and 13" wheels and tires. Not fast tho only 1 sec behind the mustangs at the time and .20 faster than the fastest stock Monte Carlo SS. I attached a picture of a crappy picture as that is all I have left of her.

Never Sell one you might regret it, I know I did.

StangII

Yeah 10.30s is about right for a factory II. When i first got into racing this particular car in the late 80s it ran 10.18 1/8. I put headers and duals, a performer intake and holley 4v and a 3.55 open differential in it and it clipped off a 9.3 1/8. A Trac lok woulda knocked a couple 10ths off to. BTW lightly modded fox bodies were clipping off anywhere from 9.1 to 9.5 1/8th.

DanS.02GT

What kind of times did the '70s Firebirds and TAs run? I think they were available with a 455 SD through '76.

Zastava_101

1970 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Formula 400: 7,708 Trans Am: 3,196
Engines: 250 I6 155 bhp. 350 V8 255 bhp. 400 V8 265 bhp. 400 V8 330 bhp @ 4800rpm, 430 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm. 400 V8 (HO) 335 bhp @ 5000rpm, 430 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm. 400 V8 (Ram Air II) 345 bhp @ 5000 rpm, 430 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm. 400 V8 (Ram Air IV) 370 bhp @ 5500 rpm, 445 lb-ft @ 3900 rpm. 400 V8 (Ram Air V) 500bhp.
Performance: 400/370 (RA IV): 0-60 in 5.6 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.9 sec @ 102 mph.

1971 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Formula: 7,802 Trans Am: 2,116
Engines: 400 V8 300 bhp @ 4800rpm, 400 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm. 455 V8 325 bhp @ 4400 rpm, 455 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm. 455 V8 (HO) 335 bhp @ 4800 rpm, 480 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm.
Performance: 455/335 (HO): 0-60 in 5.9 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.9 sec @ 103 mph.

1972 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Formula: 5,249 Trans Am: 1,286
Engines: 400 V8 250 bhp @ 4400rpm, 325 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm. 455 V8 300 bhp @ 4000 rpm, 415 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm.
Performance: N/A

1973 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Formula: 10,166 Trans Am: 4,802
Engines: 350 V8 150 bhp. 400 V8 230 bhp @ 4400rpm, 325 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm. 455 V8 250 bhp @ 4000 rpm, 370 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm. 455 (SD) V8 310 bhp @ 4000 rpm, 390 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm.
Performance: N/A

1974 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Formula: Trans Am: 10,255 Super Duty 455: 943
Engines: 350 V8 155bhp. 400 V8 225 bhp @ 4000 rpm, 330 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm. 455 V8 250 bhp @ 4000 rpm, 380 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm. 455 (SD) V8 310 bhp @ 4000 rpm, 390 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm.
Performance: SD455/310: 1/4 mile in 13.5 seconds @ 104 mph

1975 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Formula: Trans Am: 27,274
Engines: 350 V8 155bhp. 400 V8 185 bhp, 310 lb-ft. 455 V8 200 bhp @ 3800 rpm, 330 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm. 455 (HO) V8 200 bhp.
Performance: 455/200: 1/4 mile in 16.1 seconds @ 89 mph

1976 Pontiac Firebird
Production:
Engines: 350 V8 155bhp. 400 V8 185 bhp, 310 lb-ft. 455 (HO) V8 200 bhp @ 3800 rpm, 330 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm.
Performance:

1977 Pontiac Firebird
Production: Total: 155,736 (Trans Am: 68,745)
Engines: 231 V6 105 bhp. 301 V8 135 bhp. 305 V8 (California). 350 V8 (California). 350 V8 155bhp. 400 V8 185 bhp, 310 lb-ft. 403 V8.
Performance: 400/185: 1/4 mile in 16.02 sec. @ 89.64 mph.

jsaylor

By 1976 there was nothing super about the 455 anymore (pun intended). As a matter of fact the 455 in the 76 Firebird wasn't anything special at all...as it was simply the same passenger car spec 455 they stuck in every 455 powered 76 Pontiac. However, at least Pontiac still let you buy a big block pony car in 76, that has to count for something.

Tone

The base T/As were not very quick, but the 1977 - 79 WS6 cars came with an upgraded (T/A 6.6) 400 V8 that, with the right gearing and the 4 speed, would push the heavy Firebird through the quarter in the mid-15s, with a 7 second 0 - 60.

Now, that's V6 Mustang numbers today, but it was pretty quick in the late 70s. The car also came with an upgraded handling package and later cars got 4 wheel disc brakes.

The Cobra IIs weren't a quick, but Ford wasn't as serious in the engine department, either. You couldn't even get a four barrel! If I recall correctly, though, the Twos were pretty competitive from a ride and handling point of view, especially given their much lighter weight.

twincamfxd

A mustang II was better built than the camarobirds of the day. Slower? sure. But making a car that small and light, fast is not a problem.
Personally, I like those cars. They have that mustang "look", They handle pretty good for a 70's car, and they kept the mustang in production during a rough time.
We may not have one right now if it werent for the II's. Just my opinion.

88blueGT

I own a 88 GT 5.0. If anyone has a similar set up as me and they have ran their car at the track please let me know what you are running. I just want to get a general idea. Heres my mods ----> Stock 302 v8, BBK Cold Air Induction Kit, Edelbrock RPM Intake Manifold, BBK 70mm TB, MAC 1 5/8 Longtube Headers, MAC Pro-Chamber H-Pipe, Flowmaster Mufflers. If anyone has an idea of what I would run please feel free to comment.

StangII

Low 9s in the 1/8 dunno bout 1/4

bob

A4 or M5?

Luvs_the_II

Stock quarter mile times mean nothing, its how you build up the engine is what counts. Who cares about how fast it was stock?

Zastava_101

So, why would anyone buy muscle car for drag racing?

Its easier to buy Civic (for much less), who is a lot lighter, spend few grand on her, and have 12-13 sec car.

StangII

You actually make a good point Red Star but i have to agree with Luvs_the_II on this one. Its the nature of the sport. A musclecar is what you make it. Although alot of fast cars were produced, no regular production car has ever "dominated" off the showroom floor, but any car can be made to dominate. When i look at a car that i intend to use for recreation i look at how easily it can be modified. What it ran from the factory means nothing to me because whatever it was wasnt fast enough anyway. I dont care if it was a Boss 429, id want more :-)

As for your civic comparison i can buy any junk muscle car put 1500 or so in it and run circles around a 12 to 13 sec civic. Anything can be fast with enough money. Musclecars simply provide a great platform to start with in that they can typically hold any size engine ,typically have great parts availability and the chassis and engines/trans are typically much better suited to the abuse of racing.

Luvs_the_II

So, why would anyone buy muscle car for drag racing?

Its easier to buy Civic (for much less), who is a lot lighter, spend few grand on her, and have 12-13 sec car. [/b][/quote]
because civic's are gay, and I like v8's and mustangs