I ran a stock '01 Gt to 13.9 @99mph, my '93 Gt ran high 14s with full exhaust, maf and K&N, other 5.0s at the track were in the high 14-high 15 range-even notchbacks. thumbsd:

It will depend on the driver forsure.Both are awesome,no disagreeing there,the 5.0L is cheaper to mod,and the 4.6 isn't storm: .But i know with the right driver,99+ 4.6 2V without a doubt.'96 to '98 4.6 2V horsepower equals thumbsd: .

I think the mod motors are much nicer looking package

the 4V looks like an oldschool farking big block

as for what's faster......meh.....1/2 a second this way or that way....whatever

going real fast costs bucks

Not counting the 32V'er the 5.0 is a way better looking motor.

Anyway a stock 5.0 Notch will beat a stock 4.6 anyday.

i think a 5.0L coupe could smoke a 4.6 simply b/c they are lighter.

my dick is bigger than yours!

same ...they all kick ass! rockon:

Lets all just face it the 5.0 is better! smokejump:

So, I went through some back issues of Motor Trend and Car and Driver I had and found that they both tested 1992 Mustang LXs, one was a stick shift coupe for sure, tested by MT ran 14.8 the other was tested by Car and Driver (not sure of body/trans), it also ran 14.8, so basically I'm saying a PI 4.6 would beat a 5.0 stock for stock. rockon:
And, my dick is bigger than all yours!! thumb:

You both want to try me.Let's each get/find a bone stock stang of the 5.0L,and a '99+ 4.6L 2V,and i'll show you both. teeth:
Mitch Richardson ran his '03 GT 2V to a 13.9 i believe with a set of welded in flowmaster mufflers which give you little to no hp,and the rest of the stang is BONE STOCK wavehi: .


Totally agree,as my favourite stang is still the '85 GT 4 eyed.

most stock 5.0's were lucky to run a high 14

I have seen many stock (99+) 4.6's in the mid to low 14's...