0-60 times

[Steelranger2]

hey I was curious if any of you know if the 89 is actually faster then the 91 0-60. My friend was telling me that his 89 would be faster then my 91, if I'm not mistaken they are both the same? Thanks everyone!

 

[sperold]

They are pretty much the same now, the one that wins will be the one in the best tune.
The 89 is slightly lighter as it doesnot have ABS. I dont know if the unsprung weight would be much different (difference btw basketweaves and 15s to slicers with 16s) and all 4 discs are the same size on the 89.
Both would probably have a cable shifter.
The 89 has a different dash, but I doubt if it is lighter.

 

[Steelranger2]

I read that the 89 is 0-60 in 6.6 and on a couple websites it says the 91 is 7.7 is that accurate?

 

[Nuke]

On paper, and logically, they should be about the same. Driver makes a big difference, how much extra weight you are hauling around, how good a fuel each car got, and a million other things. But basically, they are rated the same, and weigh nearly the same.


Now to put a personal spin on this. This is just my opinion, and the opinion of several friends. Take that at face value.
89s are going to be faster. It doesn't matter what Ford you buy, if you have 2 different years of the same car, the 89 will run and perform better. I have had many 89s, and it is my favorite year by far. This guy I knew raced Probes and of all the ones he owned, his 2 89s were always the fastest. My 89 old ****** GT ran way better than the others I drove. I have an 89 F250 diesel with a turbo that would outrun and out pull several friends chipped Powerstrokes.

 

[SHOdded]

Seems in line with what I've read around the web.
http://sportscarstandings.com/Top-10-Fastest-Cars/1991

Stats-wise, the Spirit R/T was more bang4dabuck :0

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/1989-ford-taurus-sho-road-test-review

And just to compare, how far the Taurus has evolved:
http://blog.caranddriver.com/fords-...d-by-michigan-state-police-l-a-sheriffs-dept/
http://www.caranddriver.com/ford/taurus

 

[sperold]

A true 89 would have the little 9 1/4" clutch.

It is hard to believe that these small differences in weight could yield a 1.1 second better quarter mile time.
The weight difference of the equipment would be less that a variation of fuel in the tank.

The 89 test driver must have been a wizzard, or the 91 guy must have been asleep.

 

[shobote]

Depends on the trim also; a non-sunroof 89 is faster, all other things being equal. The shifter cable (through 91), is also about 15 lbs. lighter than a rod shifter, and the small, lighter weight clutch and flywheel spins the engine up faster. The straight through exhaust is probably slightly more efficient than the bent exhaust used with later model rod shifters. I really like my cable shifter, with the Maddog STS short shifter; no slop, solid engagement, lighter wieght, and the cable does not translate any vibrations from the motor like the rod shifter.