Mustangs................

[Vizon]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

thats true, last time i checked i spend most of my time on the INSIDE of my car while i'm driving, should be comfty and good looking.

Yep. My last mustang had the basic interior. Decided to get this one pretty much loaded.

[Georgie]

id be suprised if 0-60 were 4.4 stock for the camaro; with a CAI/tune that would make sense then

[truth411]

Originally Posted by Vizon

You have to choose your poison. I would rather have a nicer interrior and better technology. I can always fix the power thing.

What do you mean by better technology? If you are talking about Ford's 4.6 mod motor then I would respectfully disagree with you. I as this question to many mustang loyalist and have yet to here and answer that actualy uses logic, are you ready??

Question: What is the point of techonlogy that offers 0 benefits in the real world?? Ford's 4.6 mod moters are a great example, lets compare mustang to the camaro.

Mustang GT fuel economy 15/23mpg
Camaro SS fuel economy 16/24

Mustang GT 315hp/320lb-tq
Camaro SS 426/420lb-tq

The LS3 has more hp/tq and is even more fuel efficient in a heavier car. Also is is faaaaaaaar easier and cheaper to mod, a $600 cam will give the LS3 well over 500hp. for the 4.6 mod motor to even remotely touch 500hp you would need a $7000 BLOWER!!! So again what is the point of technology (4.6 SOHC V8) that offer 0 benefits I.E. less power, less torque, less fuel efficient and more expensive to modify if you are seeking big hp?

[Camaro68]

Originally Posted by levi1922

haha, yeah, people hate it if you do, people hate it if you dont.
i happen to like how the camaro has a camaro interior.

[Mindz]

Welcome to the board Vizon.

BTW, I found a great video for you...Start watching at 2:16 and watch until 3:22. This guy has a huge blower on a Drag car...yet he'll never run it.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by truth411

What do you mean by better technology? If you are talking about Ford's 4.6 mod motor then I would respectfully disagree with you. I as this question to many mustang loyalist and have yet to here and answer that actualy uses logic, are you ready??

Question: What is the point of techonlogy that offers 0 benefits in the real world?? Ford's 4.6 mod moters are a great example, lets compare mustang to the camaro.

Mustang GT fuel economy 15/23mpg
Camaro SS fuel economy 16/24

Mustang GT 315hp/320lb-tq
Camaro SS 426/420lb-tq

The LS3 has more hp/tq and is even more fuel efficient in a heavier car. Also is is faaaaaaaar easier and cheaper to mod, a $600 cam will give the LS3 well over 500hp. for the 4.6 mod motor to even remotely touch 500hp you would need a $7000 BLOWER!!! So again what is the point of technology (4.6 SOHC V8) that offer 0 benefits I.E. less power, less torque, less fuel efficient and more expensive to modify if you are seeking big hp?

i get 27mpg on the highway all day in my mustang let's talk real world numbers because they are.. well... real..

[Rock36]

Yeah. I can achieve 23.5 mpg travelling a sustained 65-70 mph, and I have 4.10 gears and a few other non-gas friendly modifications in my Mustang, so I'm running more rpm on average than most other mustangs to boot.

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by truth411

Actually one mag I think acheived 0-60 in 4.4 sec already, I can't remeber who But I will post the link later tonight (I am at work)
But in any case remeber 0-60 is vastly over rated, look at the camaro 1/4 mile time and Trap speeds!! as you keep going the gap keep widening. If I remeber correctly the mustang is redline limited to 151 mph, the camaro is electronicaly limited to 157 mph in only 4th gear!!!

+1 0-60 doesn't usually mean a lot, because those times can be heavily influenced by traction, gearing, etc....but by the end of a quarter you really get an idea of how powerful a car really is.

The Mustang is drag limited to about 150ish mph not redline limited. In theory if a mustang had the power, the redline and gearing would take a Mustang GT up to around 190ish mph with a 3.73 rear end.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Rock36

+1 0-60 doesn't usually mean a lot, because those times can be heavily influenced by traction, gearing, etc....but by the end of a quarter you really get an idea of how powerful a car really is.

The Mustang is drag limited to about 150ish mph not redline limited. In theory if a mustang had the power, the redline and gearing would take a Mustang GT up to around 190ish mph with a 3.73 rear end.

The mustang is drag limited to 150mph? i hope your not serious.

[levi1922]

Originally Posted by truth411

What do you mean by better technology? If you are talking about Ford's 4.6 mod motor then I would respectfully disagree with you. I as this question to many mustang loyalist and have yet to here and answer that actualy uses logic, are you ready??

Question: What is the point of techonlogy that offers 0 benefits in the real world?? Ford's 4.6 mod moters are a great example, lets compare mustang to the camaro.

Mustang GT fuel economy 15/23mpg
Camaro SS fuel economy 16/24

Mustang GT 315hp/320lb-tq
Camaro SS 426/420lb-tq

The LS3 has more hp/tq and is even more fuel efficient in a heavier car. Also is is faaaaaaaar easier and cheaper to mod, a $600 cam will give the LS3 well over 500hp. for the 4.6 mod motor to even remotely touch 500hp you would need a $7000 BLOWER!!! So again what is the point of technology (4.6 SOHC V8) that offer 0 benefits I.E. less power, less torque, less fuel efficient and more expensive to modify if you are seeking big hp?

no, they were not referring to the 4.6 V8, and i have said this about 1000 times, but im sorry, the LS3 is not the best engine in the world. the LTT, is a much better engine in term of technology. Its one of the most advanced available. HOWEVER there were talking about technology that is found inside the car. so basically, sat nav and dual zone aircon, is what they chose over the power. and looks are subjective, so i wont throw those into the mix, i prefer the camaros looks, but they prefer the stang. and its all good.

Originally Posted by Rock36

+1 0-60 doesn't usually mean a lot, because those times can be heavily influenced by traction, gearing, etc....but by the end of a quarter you really get an idea of how powerful a car really is.

The Mustang is drag limited to about 150ish mph not redline limited. In theory if a mustang had the power, the redline and gearing would take a Mustang GT up to around 190ish mph with a 3.73 rear end.

well, if drag resistance stay constant one you hit 70, my 95 camaro LT had a theoretical top speed of 170. but, its drag limited to about 125...drag is a huge thing, it can make or break a car, and i really doubt the camaro has much less drag

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

The mustang is drag limited to 150mph? i hope your not serious.

Very much so....

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ang_gt_feature

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/re...umentid=987644

the first article says 147 mph drag limited
the last one says 151 mph drag limited

Coefficient of drag on our Mustangs is terrible to begin with why is this so surprising?

[levi1922]

Originally Posted by Rock36

Very much so....

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ang_gt_feature

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/re...umentid=987644

the first article says 147 mph drag limited
the last one says 151 mph drag limited

Coefficient of drag on our Mustangs is terrible to begin with why is this so surprising?

what is there coefficient of drag? the ss camaro is .35 and the ls/lt is .37

[Rock36]

Off the top of my head it is 0.38

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Rock36

Very much so....

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ang_gt_feature

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/re...umentid=987644

the first article says 147 mph drag limited
the last one says 151 mph drag limited

Coefficient of drag on our Mustangs is terrible to begin with why is this so surprising?

Because i have been in my idiot friends mustang @ 165mph. and heard countless stories of speeds past 160... the air doesnt just stop the car at 151.