thanks for the correction. I was not aware the Lighting now has the 5.4 SOHC engine , basically, a strocked version of the 4.6 Liter engine. I thought it still used the old 5.8 Liter engine that was essentially a strocked 302 engine stroked to 351 Windswor size. (the 351W is a strocked 302W)
The Lincoln Mark 8 with the 4.6 Liter with a supercharger is going against the 5.8 liter OHV engine but a truck that has more weight. So in terms of power to weight ratio, very similar. I am surprised the Overhead Cam Cobra engine in the Mark 8 didn' t do better at the top end, where it should have out performed the ancient 351 Cubic inch (5.8 liter) over head valve engine
@alexnds1 lol the first gen lightning came with the old 351. This is a second gen lightning. I think the supercharger you're hearing is off the truck because they came supercharged, mark iiis did not. A mark iii with a supercharged would have (should have) walked the lightning.
@alexnds1 the lincoln mark 8 is around 4200lbs stock...4400 with the average size man in it...plus another 100 or 150lbs with the amount of shit we carry in our cars haha so thats reaching around 4500 on the low end so they are pretty heavy cars lol
@bad65stang You are completely right. In terms of power to weight ratio, these two were evenly matched, because the bigger 5.4 Liter SOHC engine was up against it's smaller brother, the 4.6 engine. However, the Mustang is about 3200 lbs vs the truck 4400 lbs, so the power to weight is a fair fight. I think in the case of moving a heavy vehicle off the line, gears such as 4:1 rear ratio instead of 3.55:1 help get the truck moving faster. However, truck came with mileage friendly 3.35:1 I think
@MrHotrodlincoln huh well thats funny because im totally gunna believe some wikipedia site and not the scales that I personally had my car weighed on. Think before you talk asshole
@bad65stang You're an idiot and know not nearly as much as I do about the Mark VIIIs apparently. Just deal with the fact that you have came across a subject that you have no knowledge in. You may know all about erectile dysfunction but this is not a topic that you have any clue about. I suppose those 3 cinder blocks in the trunk came as a standard option? LMAO! Dig out your brochure that came with the car and see exactly what I mean dumbfucker.
@bad65stang You must be one fat fucker or working off of some other number system from some other dimension where you apparently came from if you scaled out at 4200# with a 1996 Mark VIII. LMAO! Keep talking like a sausage. You didn't weigh anything.
@MrHotrodlincoln really 4200#s thats a bit far fetched i might be big but damn im 220#s and i weighed in at 4125 in my 97 lsc...with coil conversion...2 12in kicker l7s and 17in rims...subs by themselfs were 100 with box...coil conversion adds 75...so 395 pounds off of the initial weight...3800 roughly...this was at a scale where they take scrap metal...
@1sik3297 Yup. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. 4200# on a bone stock Mark VIII with nothing added is far fetched even with the weight of the driver factored in. I too did the same thing. I weighed my car on a certified scale and it was 4040# with me in it. I love how other people come on here and pull numbers out of their ass. Bad65stang says 4500# on the low end with all of the "shit" we carry in our cars. Yeah, like what? Fucking lead? LOL
@bad65stang Edmunds and consumer guide both list the curb weight under 3800#. How's that for wikipedia dumbass? My buddy's 4-door Crown Vic scaled at 4200# IN REAL LIFE. That's a 4-door with an iron-block and we have a 2-door with an all aluminum block. So how does that work again? Need I go on? Don't think so. You just got owned by MrHotrodlincoln himself. Have a nice day. Can't wait for everyone too see this. You just made your mouth an insertion point for your foot. :-)
@bad65stang Oh and by the way, you just lost all credibility when you admit on your channel that you are 16. Yeah, go figure. A stupid punk kid that doesn't know shit from his own asshole. I've driven more cars than you have been on this earth in years. Go play with your pokemon.
@MrHotrodlincoln well arent you a badass I may be 16 but I know what im talking about....I know I dont know everything there is to know about cars but I sure as hell know how to read a fucking scale dickhole....oh and btw you were 16 once so go blow it out your ass
Who Gives A fuck about the Ford 2011 mustang GT. I guess mustang guys haven't yet checked out the New Camaro 2011 z/28. Which will mind fuck the GT and have the KR GT500 blow it.
@1chucky1inglewood1 you in fact are wrong, a 2011 mustang gt will beat a 2011 camaro ss even with the lower horsepower. There are a ton of videos on here to prove that the mustang is a better car
@1chucky1inglewood1 You're an idiot. The 2011 Mustang 5.0 has been proven time and time again to be faster than the 2011 Camaro SS. Why do you continue to make an asshole out of yourself? Get off your Chevrolet obsession that makes you speak mindlessly and just accept the fact the Mustang is faster. You really sound like a bumbling fool.
Most car manufacturers over rate their engines and other performance numbers. They do it to get people to buy them. So if all engines are overrated then its an even playing field.
@mexmiler grammas car? shows how much you know mark viii's would smoke most 90's mustangs if it wasnt for the mark viii as the first car for ford's 4.6 32v modular there wouldnt have been a new cobra and superior motor to chevys, the mustang would have faltered to the camaro. the teksid blocks out of the mark viii have alot of potential and can handle lots of boost and handle more power than the romeo blocks so next time you assume something guess again
@oohmammaoohmamma Incorrect, but nice try. The camaro never had a chance because Chevy put too many extras into them and at those price points, they couldn't compete with the mustang. That's cute that you're trying to defend your hand-me-down grannymobile, but sorry, you're completely delusional.
@mexmiler performance wise dick the camaro would have ran all over the mustang if the pushrod 5.0 was still around, you just dont appreciate what the mark viii did for mustangs today just think if there was no mark viii there would be no 5.4 or new 5.0 and ford did consider it a performance motor hence them building one supercharged model in a joint effort with tasca which is basically the guidelines for the 03-04 cobras and gt500's dude go do some research before trying to troll vids brah
@oohmammaoohmamma Would have run all over the mustangs? Newsflash: The camaros DID and still DO run all over the mustangs. They're better cars. ...Oh, and the Lincoln or Buick or whatever old person car you were just talkin about is still an old person car
@mexmiler obviously you know nothing about cars because the mustangs always outperformed camaros in the 60's early 70's 80's 90's and now with the new 2011 they are already beating them again, and please dont try and spew your mindless nonsense when you dont even know the make of the car your talking about or the capabilites of it, your just a very ignorant person who argues with no valid points christ you probably drive a chevy lumina or something godawful like that so stfu and gtfo
@oohmammaoohmamma The 2010 V6 Camaro has just as much horsepower as a MUSTANG GT, 300 hp, and the Camaro SS has 100 more hp that the Mustang GT... how exactly does this make the mustang the winner? Data wins over stupidity. Anything else?
@mexmiler re-read what i said i said 2011 mustang idiot and chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
@oohmammaoohmamma Posting it 4 times doesn't make you right buddy. It took Ford 2 years to catch up to the Camaro. The mustangs JUST NOW MATCH UP TO the Camaro in terms of engine output numbers. Why do you think this makes them superior? Also, I'd like to know where you're getting the impression that Ford underrates their horsepower numbers. Are you saying Chevy overrates theirs? Because that would be idiotic, so I fully expect that from you.
@mexmiler@mexmiler re-read what i said i said 2011 mustang idiot and chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
@mexmiler re-read what i said,THE 2011 MUSTANG, chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
@mexmiler re-read what i said i said 2011 mustang idiot and chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
@oohmammaoohmamma Furthermore, if the older V6 mustangs were any indication of "underrating power" that point is completely invalid. They had a 4 liter V6 that Ford claimed put out 210 hp. If you ever drove one or raced against one, they moved like they barely had 130 hp. Gas mileage... nobody cares about, you don't buy a muscle car for gas mileage. The '11 Civic gets better gas mileage than the '11 V6 mustang. Does that make it better? And FYI, I drive a Ford, so blow me.
A stock lightning is pretty quick, and a stock Mark VIII is in the 14.8-15.2 range so just bench racing I'd give the race to the truck. Mark VIII responds well to modifications, though.
does anyone know why it is that most people just do a underdrive crank pulley and not the waterpump or alternator? Isnt a kit for a 96-98 cobra a direct fit? Any info would be a huge help
Interesting outcome
hammerogod 7 months ago
Nice
that wasa pretty close race!
yourmotherrules 8 months ago
Other than the supercharger, I'm assuming your Mark VIII is bone stock?
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
Forgive my ignorance. but that race looked close. who had it, and how close was it, half a car length or?
yamahonkawazuki 11 months ago
thanks for the correction. I was not aware the Lighting now has the 5.4 SOHC engine , basically, a strocked version of the 4.6 Liter engine. I thought it still used the old 5.8 Liter engine that was essentially a strocked 302 engine stroked to 351 Windswor size. (the 351W is a strocked 302W)
alexnds1 1 year ago
@alexnds1: Ford actually no longer manufacture push rod motors for any of their production cars or trucks.
V8Supercar1 1 year ago
The Lincoln Mark 8 with the 4.6 Liter with a supercharger is going against the 5.8 liter OHV engine but a truck that has more weight. So in terms of power to weight ratio, very similar. I am surprised the Overhead Cam Cobra engine in the Mark 8 didn' t do better at the top end, where it should have out performed the ancient 351 Cubic inch (5.8 liter) over head valve engine
alexnds1 1 year ago
@alexnds1 You mean 5.4L SOHC in the Lightning, right.
Flynnt22 1 year ago 3
@alexnds1 lol the first gen lightning came with the old 351. This is a second gen lightning. I think the supercharger you're hearing is off the truck because they came supercharged, mark iiis did not. A mark iii with a supercharged would have (should have) walked the lightning.
bballman345 1 year ago
@alexnds1 also, the lincoln is naturally aspirated
SuperBigBMan 1 year ago
@alexnds1 the lincoln mark 8 is around 4200lbs stock...4400 with the average size man in it...plus another 100 or 150lbs with the amount of shit we carry in our cars haha so thats reaching around 4500 on the low end so they are pretty heavy cars lol
bad65stang 10 months ago
@bad65stang You are completely right. In terms of power to weight ratio, these two were evenly matched, because the bigger 5.4 Liter SOHC engine was up against it's smaller brother, the 4.6 engine. However, the Mustang is about 3200 lbs vs the truck 4400 lbs, so the power to weight is a fair fight. I think in the case of moving a heavy vehicle off the line, gears such as 4:1 rear ratio instead of 3.55:1 help get the truck moving faster. However, truck came with mileage friendly 3.35:1 I think
alexnds1 10 months ago
@alexnds1 thats a lincoln not a mustang
andyass3 10 months ago
Comment removed
andyass3 10 months ago
@bad65stang No Mark VIII is 4400# My 98 weighed out at 3760 without me in it. Average is 4000# or less with driver.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@MrHotrodlincoln idk about the 98's but the 94's weigh around 4200 stock rolling off of the lot
bad65stang 9 months ago
@bad65stang No, they don't either. Look it up.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@MrHotrodlincoln huh well thats funny because im totally gunna believe some wikipedia site and not the scales that I personally had my car weighed on. Think before you talk asshole
bad65stang 9 months ago
@bad65stang You're an idiot and know not nearly as much as I do about the Mark VIIIs apparently. Just deal with the fact that you have came across a subject that you have no knowledge in. You may know all about erectile dysfunction but this is not a topic that you have any clue about. I suppose those 3 cinder blocks in the trunk came as a standard option? LMAO! Dig out your brochure that came with the car and see exactly what I mean dumbfucker.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@bad65stang You must be one fat fucker or working off of some other number system from some other dimension where you apparently came from if you scaled out at 4200# with a 1996 Mark VIII. LMAO! Keep talking like a sausage. You didn't weigh anything.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@MrHotrodlincoln really 4200#s thats a bit far fetched i might be big but damn im 220#s and i weighed in at 4125 in my 97 lsc...with coil conversion...2 12in kicker l7s and 17in rims...subs by themselfs were 100 with box...coil conversion adds 75...so 395 pounds off of the initial weight...3800 roughly...this was at a scale where they take scrap metal...
1sik3297 3 months ago
@1sik3297 Yup. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. 4200# on a bone stock Mark VIII with nothing added is far fetched even with the weight of the driver factored in. I too did the same thing. I weighed my car on a certified scale and it was 4040# with me in it. I love how other people come on here and pull numbers out of their ass. Bad65stang says 4500# on the low end with all of the "shit" we carry in our cars. Yeah, like what? Fucking lead? LOL
MrHotrodlincoln 3 months ago
@MrHotrodlincoln oh well an other person that looks at the gross vehicle weight on the door and not the curb weight..
1sik3297 3 months ago
@bad65stang Edmunds and consumer guide both list the curb weight under 3800#. How's that for wikipedia dumbass? My buddy's 4-door Crown Vic scaled at 4200# IN REAL LIFE. That's a 4-door with an iron-block and we have a 2-door with an all aluminum block. So how does that work again? Need I go on? Don't think so. You just got owned by MrHotrodlincoln himself. Have a nice day. Can't wait for everyone too see this. You just made your mouth an insertion point for your foot. :-)
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@bad65stang Oh and by the way, you just lost all credibility when you admit on your channel that you are 16. Yeah, go figure. A stupid punk kid that doesn't know shit from his own asshole. I've driven more cars than you have been on this earth in years. Go play with your pokemon.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@MrHotrodlincoln well arent you a badass I may be 16 but I know what im talking about....I know I dont know everything there is to know about cars but I sure as hell know how to read a fucking scale dickhole....oh and btw you were 16 once so go blow it out your ass
bad65stang 9 months ago
@bad65stang Yup, I'm badass. No need to remind me of that.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
@MrHotrodlincoln That's pretty close to what my 96' weighs.
CarpathianCarl 7 months ago
@CarpathianCarl OK
MrHotrodlincoln 7 months ago
Who Gives A fuck about the Ford 2011 mustang GT. I guess mustang guys haven't yet checked out the New Camaro 2011 z/28. Which will mind fuck the GT and have the KR GT500 blow it.
1chucky1inglewood1 1 year ago
@1chucky1inglewood1 You're language is offensive! She's a nice lady!
dlowrie290 1 year ago
@1chucky1inglewood1 and the boss 302 will kick the z/28's ass we'llreally see who is the best
xBloodfatherx 1 year ago
@1chucky1inglewood1 you in fact are wrong, a 2011 mustang gt will beat a 2011 camaro ss even with the lower horsepower. There are a ton of videos on here to prove that the mustang is a better car
andyass3 1 year ago
@andyass3 ...FACT
gstak07 1 year ago
@1chucky1inglewood1 You're an idiot. The 2011 Mustang 5.0 has been proven time and time again to be faster than the 2011 Camaro SS. Why do you continue to make an asshole out of yourself? Get off your Chevrolet obsession that makes you speak mindlessly and just accept the fact the Mustang is faster. You really sound like a bumbling fool.
MrHotrodlincoln 9 months ago
Most car manufacturers over rate their engines and other performance numbers. They do it to get people to buy them. So if all engines are overrated then its an even playing field.
roadcracks 1 year ago
Ummm.....This video is about a Mustand racing a F-150 Lightning, why are we talking about a camaro?
bigwillie136 1 year ago
my dads the one racing the mark 8 :(
Mrphatboi19 1 year ago
@Mrphatboi19 My brother and I are the ones racing.
Flynnt22 1 year ago 2
@Mrphatboi19 yea dumb shit
slurpy911 1 year ago
@Mrphatboi19 LOL! You got caught trying to look cool.. Classic troll fail. LOL
Burnz2much 1 year ago
is th 280 hp for the engine or the Rear wheels
lupecolts 2 years ago
no its @ the crank only 225 i think to the wheels
the LSC make 290 to crank
maxis3117 2 years ago
i ran exactly the same quarter mile time and the same mph
minitruckermtz 2 years ago
ive beaten lightnings on the parkway with a stock mark viii 4.6 32v is just sick
oohmammaoohmamma 2 years ago
@oohmammaoohmamma Sure you have. Oh, remember to give grammy her car back when you're done trying to race trucks
mexmiler 1 year ago
@mexmiler grammas car? shows how much you know mark viii's would smoke most 90's mustangs if it wasnt for the mark viii as the first car for ford's 4.6 32v modular there wouldnt have been a new cobra and superior motor to chevys, the mustang would have faltered to the camaro. the teksid blocks out of the mark viii have alot of potential and can handle lots of boost and handle more power than the romeo blocks so next time you assume something guess again
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@oohmammaoohmamma Incorrect, but nice try. The camaro never had a chance because Chevy put too many extras into them and at those price points, they couldn't compete with the mustang. That's cute that you're trying to defend your hand-me-down grannymobile, but sorry, you're completely delusional.
mexmiler 1 year ago
@mexmiler performance wise dick the camaro would have ran all over the mustang if the pushrod 5.0 was still around, you just dont appreciate what the mark viii did for mustangs today just think if there was no mark viii there would be no 5.4 or new 5.0 and ford did consider it a performance motor hence them building one supercharged model in a joint effort with tasca which is basically the guidelines for the 03-04 cobras and gt500's dude go do some research before trying to troll vids brah
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@oohmammaoohmamma Would have run all over the mustangs? Newsflash: The camaros DID and still DO run all over the mustangs. They're better cars. ...Oh, and the Lincoln or Buick or whatever old person car you were just talkin about is still an old person car
mexmiler 1 year ago
@mexmiler obviously you know nothing about cars because the mustangs always outperformed camaros in the 60's early 70's 80's 90's and now with the new 2011 they are already beating them again, and please dont try and spew your mindless nonsense when you dont even know the make of the car your talking about or the capabilites of it, your just a very ignorant person who argues with no valid points christ you probably drive a chevy lumina or something godawful like that so stfu and gtfo
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@oohmammaoohmamma The 2010 V6 Camaro has just as much horsepower as a MUSTANG GT, 300 hp, and the Camaro SS has 100 more hp that the Mustang GT... how exactly does this make the mustang the winner? Data wins over stupidity. Anything else?
mexmiler 1 year ago
@mexmiler re-read what i said i said 2011 mustang idiot and chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@oohmammaoohmamma Posting it 4 times doesn't make you right buddy. It took Ford 2 years to catch up to the Camaro. The mustangs JUST NOW MATCH UP TO the Camaro in terms of engine output numbers. Why do you think this makes them superior? Also, I'd like to know where you're getting the impression that Ford underrates their horsepower numbers. Are you saying Chevy overrates theirs? Because that would be idiotic, so I fully expect that from you.
mexmiler 1 year ago
@mexmiler @mexmiler re-read what i said i said 2011 mustang idiot and chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@mexmiler re-read what i said,THE 2011 MUSTANG, chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@mexmiler re-read what i said i said 2011 mustang idiot and chevy and dodge are not doing anything to compete, the new gt's have an underrated 412hp and the v6's have an underrated 305hp along with 30mpg again along with being a few hundred pounds lighter than the camaro and much lighter than the challenger. like what i said before you don't know what you are talking about so please be quiet or do you want to be mindfucked more?
oohmammaoohmamma 1 year ago
@oohmammaoohmamma Furthermore, if the older V6 mustangs were any indication of "underrating power" that point is completely invalid. They had a 4 liter V6 that Ford claimed put out 210 hp. If you ever drove one or raced against one, they moved like they barely had 130 hp. Gas mileage... nobody cares about, you don't buy a muscle car for gas mileage. The '11 Civic gets better gas mileage than the '11 V6 mustang. Does that make it better? And FYI, I drive a Ford, so blow me.
mexmiler 1 year ago
I hate tracks where you can't go around the water. It KILLS your ET if your on street tires (even if just the fronts are street tires).
FiredUpZ28 2 years ago
dont these cars come with 300 bhp stock
markmarshall39 3 years ago
280 hp until the LSCs came out, then the LSCs had 290 although the extra 10 hp didn't really affect performance much.
infarc 3 years ago
whats in the mark 8? thats serious drag comp and time. thats deffinatly not stock is it?
JX426 3 years ago
No it says its supercharged. Its got a 4.6L DOHC motor making between 280-290 hp.
damascusmotorsports 3 years ago
just put a tuner even without the pulley and that lightning will wake up seriously
Stang323 3 years ago
his mark viii wouldnt hook up, or else it would have taken the truck...get some slicks on that thing justin lol
Diems94yj 3 years ago
A stock lightning is pretty quick, and a stock Mark VIII is in the 14.8-15.2 range so just bench racing I'd give the race to the truck. Mark VIII responds well to modifications, though.
infarc 3 years ago
Also, stock Mark VII is only going to do 94 or so in the quarter, that's obviously had some work done to it.
infarc 3 years ago
does anyone know why it is that most people just do a underdrive crank pulley and not the waterpump or alternator? Isnt a kit for a 96-98 cobra a direct fit? Any info would be a huge help
grindking10000 3 years ago
Mark 8 is doing 103.23 Lightning 101.60 do the Math! Hope this helped you all The Mark 8 Rules!
adrian1713 3 years ago
yup yup the mark is pulling.
damascusmotorsports 3 years ago
really dang close!!
REHJR2008 3 years ago
Wow, that was really close!
Kremcroc 3 years ago
Ive watched this like 12 times! i wish mine was that fast....
boyint 3 years ago
sex on wheels from FoMoCo. ahh, what happened to the good old days.
August171964 4 years ago
thats wat i said
tullasmachine 4 years ago
That was a good race!
ultrafamilyguy 4 years ago