power to weight ratio? different gearing? driver? it can go on.
or he had a 4 cylinder, and no turbo and blatantly lied to you88cavalierz24 said:power to weight ratio? different gearing? driver? it can go on.
X2 :lol:barrok69 said:or he had a 4 cylinder, and no turbo and blatantly lied to you88cavalierz24 said:power to weight ratio? different gearing? driver? it can go on.lol.
X2. Being a 4X4, the weight of the extra drive train almost mathes the weight of a J-body :lol:techoverload said:oh oh oh... pick me I know.... Its a damn FORD! It dont matter what you got in a ford, their still nothing but a POS.
buddy of mine has 2 rangers, one's a 4x4 and hes got a f150. he keeps bragging that their the shit but none of them can keep up with me.acurategguy said:X2. Being a 4X4, the weight of the extra drive train almost mathes the weight of a J-body :lol:techoverload said:oh oh oh... pick me I know.... Its a damn FORD! It dont matter what you got in a ford, their still nothing but a POS.
Thats wrong. My stock 2.8 auto with a slipping trans ran a 16.2robtco99 said:A stock 2.8 auto conv runs 17's.... I used to have the same car only a 3.1.
It could of had a turbo and just ran like shit, no tune, etc or just have been a 2.3. But a stock 4.0 5 speed should run faster than a 17.
Dude stop digging up old threads!! seriously! Look at the damn date at the top of every single freaking post in the thread. I mean may of 07 this thread, 2002 in the last one you posted in?jammert609 said:a 5.0 or 4.0 4x4 would beat yall threw the mudd easyly..