To each his own. I liked the fact, that it made the engine bay not so crappy looking. I did lose a little torque, but in retrospect, do you really need that much torque? Not that they have much at all already, but a little more gas to rev it up counters the loss for torque. Plus the mpg goes up. I never really raced off the line anyways, usually it would be when I am already driving...making the headers more effective.

 

I guess I've always been an "off-the-line" kind of guy. Although I know I am driving the wrong car if that's the kind of guy I am.
I'm sure it's becasue of the stupid 300ft lb torque Mustangs I've always driven! What can I say? I guess I'm more of a torque junkie than an hp junkie.

 

Hey torque junkie ...... I hear that there's a kit so you can put a Ford 5.0 in an old 240SX ...... that would cook!

 

Yeah it probably would. The stock 95 240 SX is only about 250lbs lighter than a stock 90 5.0 Mustang LX. IMO not worth the trouble of going through the swap for a mere 250lb weight reduction. Actually, now that I think about it,when you add the 5.0 engine to the 240 SX, it would probably weighMORE than the 90 5.0 LX.

 

and outhandle it any day!!!

 

Definitely! But torque junkies don't worry about handling! Who needs to turn anyways?

 

LOL ...... and what does your torque get you when I can bob and weave in traffic at 0.9 g's ......... DUSTED!!!!

 

You stay ahead of the traffic!

 

LOL .... I forgot that you are in Mississippi ...... a lot less cars on the road. I've had it take 3 hrs to get from mid-town to the Lincoln Tunnel ..... about a third of a mile! NJ is a little better, but there are never empty roads.

 

I was about to bring that up. My house is about 15 miles away from where I work and I get super mad if it takes me more than 20 minutes to get to work in the morning! I could not imagine driving in a high traffic city.