87 VS 91 gas
#21
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure how you came to the conclusion that the thead was "elitist" -- about a vacuous term there is these days -- as most actually stood up for the Mustang and most of the criticisms seemed pretty well founded and in context (Mustang being a much cheaper car than a Porsche). Sure, a few inevitable fanboy posts, not so different from this forum, but nice to see different perspectives. I'd like to see a Porsche get as charitable a treatment on this board.
Anyhooo, back to OP, yeah I recall the 412/390 figure running on 91 octane rather than 87 swill. I wonder if the ECU is flexible enough to get even more power out of 93 octane (highest pump gas I see around DC). 425/400 would make for nice round figures :-)
Anyhooo, back to OP, yeah I recall the 412/390 figure running on 91 octane rather than 87 swill. I wonder if the ECU is flexible enough to get even more power out of 93 octane (highest pump gas I see around DC). 425/400 would make for nice round figures :-)
#22
Dave
#23
Post *****
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 20,005
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
But aftermarket tuners would surely be able to tweak for areas that have 93... but without the flexible aspect from the factory (thus far, no tuner I am aware of has designed Bullitt tunes to run on 93 but pull timing for tanks of 87. Everything I've read you have to upload another tune if you drop to 87.)
#24
Team Mustang Source
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
I liked on the 6speed forum how some of the guys were bashing the Mustang by saying it was so crude and couldn't go around corners...yet they also admitted they had last driven one 7 years ago. As we all know the difference between the SN95 and the S197 chassis is not even comparable. They are totally right that the SN95 was crude and couldn't corner...etc... but I wonder what they would be saying if they had driven a 2010 instead of a 2002?
#25
Legacy TMS Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
You ever drive a 2001 Bullitt? It was a reasonably balanced handling car, given the state of the SN-95 technology of the time.
#26
GT Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: Irvine, California
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I liked on the 6speed forum how some of the guys were bashing the Mustang by saying it was so crude and couldn't go around corners...yet they also admitted they had last driven one 7 years ago. As we all know the difference between the SN95 and the S197 chassis is not even comparable. They are totally right that the SN95 was crude and couldn't corner...etc... but I wonder what they would be saying if they had driven a 2010 instead of a 2002?
![Doh](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/smilies/doh.gif)
#27
GT Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: Irvine, California
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a 2001 Bullitt and 2005 GT owner . . .. . I would say the 01 Bullitt handles BETTER that the 05 (the suspension is tighter and the car corners much flatter) . . . . .. . Better is probably an overstatement . . .. . . but considering the floorpan was 100 years old .. . . . it handles good!
Last edited by lsanch33; 1/4/10 at 07:42 PM.
#34
Modding an N/A Ford engine has become less and less productive as the years go by. Ford gives us an optimized engine from the gates.
You could DOUBLE the 1993 5.0's N/A power with a heads/cam/intake package and associated fuel system upgrades. Anyone seen a 600HP N/A 3v running around?
Boost is really the way to go.
You could DOUBLE the 1993 5.0's N/A power with a heads/cam/intake package and associated fuel system upgrades. Anyone seen a 600HP N/A 3v running around?
Boost is really the way to go.
#35
Mach 1 Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: January 18, 2010
Location: KC, MO
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe it or not I am a Mustang guy in my heart. I hit my mid 30's and something happened...I cared about the rest of the car..not just how fast it goes. Ford is finally building a car that I can enjoy to the full extent not just horsepower.
I can't even tell you the ribbing I got back in 01-07 when I owned E46 M3s..the guys on Roadfly just tore me up. Anyway I'm not a fanbois anymore, I still have my favorites but I won't dismiss the obvious when it comes to talking about cars.
Dave
I can't even tell you the ribbing I got back in 01-07 when I owned E46 M3s..the guys on Roadfly just tore me up. Anyway I'm not a fanbois anymore, I still have my favorites but I won't dismiss the obvious when it comes to talking about cars.
Dave
#36
Modding an N/A Ford engine has become less and less productive as the years go by. Ford gives us an optimized engine from the gates.
You could DOUBLE the 1993 5.0's N/A power with a heads/cam/intake package and associated fuel system upgrades. Anyone seen a 600HP N/A 3v running around?
Boost is really the way to go.
You could DOUBLE the 1993 5.0's N/A power with a heads/cam/intake package and associated fuel system upgrades. Anyone seen a 600HP N/A 3v running around?
Boost is really the way to go.
Since you don't know how the new engine will respond to mods, what was the point of this post?
#37
Dave
#39
Team Mustang Source
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,738
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#40
Dave