TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey just some hope for the guys thinking their v6 is a slow pos. My friend's 93 Mark VIII kills me in a 1/4 mile--but I gotta tell ya, being a car length ahead at 55 mph (and him closing FAST) shows our v6 N/A birds can still put up a fight with just a few mods. He is having some problems with what we think is his cat-convs. Still bragging rights are there :D


+180* Thermo
+New plugs/wires
+K & N Cone & heat shield
+delete res, 2.25" dual from catalytic converter back magnaflow mufflers
+B&M electric shift kit (i know, i know..)
+2 piece U/D ASP pulleys
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
Aside from it having issues is his Mark modded or still stock?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
I had a 93 Mark. With 4.11 gears and flowmasters it would kill, and I mean destroy, stock Mustang Gt's. If it's not running right its a nightmare. At points my car would be running on 7 cylinders and would be a toad, kept fowling plugs. Stock it was pretty quick, I don't doubt it would lay the smack down on my highly moded Tbird right now. He's got somthing big time wrong, realistic 0-60 times on a stock mark with good traction running properly should be around 6.4-6.5 seconds. Our Tbirds, v6 or v8, are terribly slow in stock or near stock form. All things considered your car is perhaps 8 seconds to 60. Maybe you're just a better driver man.

Keep laying the smack down and keep the T bird pride.
Steve
 

·
Who is John Galt?
Joined
·
6,476 Posts
According to albeedigital the stock 0-60 times are:
1993 Lincoln Mark VIII 7.1
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX V6 8.8

I know that 97 got an extra 5hp at the crank, but that's still a heck of a difference. Not to rain on your parade, but I think there's something wrong with the Mark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
thats marks TQ modifiers in the intake manifold are probaby broken. lol I drive an NA 3.8 and I don't see how I could take any Mark VIII off the line to 60.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Its a stock 93 and yeah, the thing will move but right now he's having a bit of difficulty with it (might sell it for an STi)-- but I think one main advantage we have in our birds is that it is near impossible to lose crucial traction at launch 0-60. I can take her up to about 2100 rpms and launch, whereas if he tried the same thing (and I've been in the car when it happend) the rear end slides out wide to the left before gripping the road.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
he also has LSD and gets torque at BOTH rear tires. he can get more traction than you! if the car was in perfect running order with a good driver it would take you.
 

·
Stroked and Blown
Joined
·
2,395 Posts
cougar_guy04 said:
According to albeedigital the stock 0-60 times are:
1993 Lincoln Mark VIII 7.1
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX V6 8.8

I know that 97 got an extra 5hp at the crank, but that's still a heck of a difference. Not to rain on your parade, but I think there's something wrong with the Mark.
1994 Ford Thunderbird LX V6 0-60 in 8.8? I think those statistics are wrong. That 8.8 0-60 MUST be a 4.6. A 0-60 for a stock 3.8 n/a should be 10-12 seconds. Trust me, I have one. Anybody else agree with me?

BTW-Thunderexcite, I don't want to ruin your enthusiasm, but being a n/a 3.8 MN12 owner, you have a right to know that they are SLUGS. Minivans can beat them. Your 1/4 mile is probably in the 17 second range. They are seriously, slow cars and they can not put up a good fight, unless they're going against farm equipment, as someone here once told me.

They can be made faster but it will take alot of work. I have a CAI, dual exhaust, underdrive pulleys, transgo shift kit, high stall torque converter, and my best is only 16.9 (That was in early March weather upper 30's) and about 1,000 feet above sea level.) My other times were all 17.0-17.2. Our 3.8 n/a Thunderbirds can probably beat some stock Cavaliers, Civics, Focuses and other rice, but just barely. I'm not trying to start anything, I'm just giving you a heads up. Most people here will agree with me. Come on Thomas, where are you?;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,180 Posts
ThunderExcite said:
Hey just some hope for the guys thinking their v6 is a slow pos. My friend's 93 Mark VIII kills me in a 1/4 mile--but I gotta tell ya, being a car length ahead at 55 mph (and him closing FAST) shows our v6 N/A birds can still put up a fight with just a few mods. He is having some problems with what we think is his cat-convs. Still bragging rights are there :D


+180* Thermo
+New plugs/wires
+K & N Cone & heat shield
+delete res, 2.25" dual from catalytic converter back magnaflow mufflers
+B&M electric shift kit (i know, i know..)
+2 piece U/D ASP pulleys
Sorry, but when your racing a car that's stock and not even running right and you've got underdrive pulleys, shift kit, exhaust work etc. done there's not much bragging rights in beating him to 55 mph and still getting stomped on in the 1/4 mile. :(

In stock form and running right his Mark should leave you behind right off the line...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
I've seen Stock Mark's on slicks with good air hit 15 flat, I've even seen one time slip of a 14.9. The 4.6 in those cars is a sophisticated powerhouse. Consider how broken his car must be. Same gear ratio, same trans ratio and double the power in a car of the same weight. Birds make me sad :(
 

·
Stroked and Blown
Joined
·
2,395 Posts
rancherlee said:
Stock mine ran a best of [email protected] 2.36 60ft (2.36 60ft is around a 8.8 0-60 )

Yu're car must be a factory freak then. How the hell did you get it to do 16.9 stock? Mine does 16.9 now and I have some mods. Did you race it like it was a manual, or did you put it in drive and go? Any other tips?
 

·
Moderator, Iowa Chapter Director, Uber Luber, TCCo
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
Rancher's car has always been considered somewhat of a factory freak. I have even heard of some stock 3.8's. I mean completely stock 3.8 tbirds going low 16's.

A guy in my area on here, PCD, has a 97 3.8 with a shift kit and underdrives and went 16.9 last summer.

-Thomas
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,921 Posts
I shifted manually but I also had a pair of DR's on the back since I had trouble with spinning one wheel off the line.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top