2011 Mustang GT: The Toughest Opponent Yet?

[steeleshark2]

What about everything that has to support the engine, transmission, suspension ect. Extra horsepower = extra torque = more stength in equipment to support it which equals more weight. IE why is a convertable more weight then the standard car and has a lighter roof.
Answer: more support and bracing but engine and transmission is the same.

There is more to a cars weight then engine and transmission. That is all I am trying to say.

[garagelogic]

Originally Posted by SLOWHITE

One thing I notice in the Mustang vs Camaro (aside from weight & horsepower) is the chasis's ability to get traction off the line. I don't think magazine tests are the bible, but one thing I notice is that for some reason the 540hp GT 500 is usually only about .1 quicker in the 1/4 mile than the SS Camaro. Usually these magazines say something like it's tricky to launch the Mustang, but IF you get it right you'll achieve a xxxx time in what ever acc test. So if 540 hp is just a tad quicker than the SS, the 415 hp Mustang shouldn't be as quick. Now of course once you get into spending money for tires...things will change. But Mustangs in mildly stock form don't seem to get traction unless it involves drag radials and smokey burnouts. I know a guy who has a 12.6 Mustang when on drag radials and a smokey burnout. On the street, on street tires, I beat him every time. One last ramble, I doubt the 2011 GT will be as quick as the GT500 (in stock forms) which is what it has to be to beat a Camaro SS.

Well, dang! I must be a hell of a driver then, because I was running mid-twelves in my stock 2007 GT500 with its measly 500hp and 1.9x 60ft times on the stock Goodyears. Oh, but then you are going to use the one instance where a 2010 GT500 and 2010 Camaro SS were compared and one beat the other by a tenth of a second to establish the idea that this is the "usual" variance of every race between the two models in the quarter mile. Please, go back to doing whatever you were doing before your other 5 posts in the forum.

Originally Posted by steeleshark2

What about everything that has to support the engine, transmission, suspension ect. Extra horsepower = extra torque = more stength in equipment to support it which equals more weight. IE why is a convertable more weight then the standard car and has a lighter roof.
Answer: more support and bracing but engine and transmission is the same.

There is more to a cars weight then engine and transmission. That is all I am trying to say.

So, since you obviously understand S197 Mustangs better than so many of us who have actually owned, wrenched and raced them, why don't you explain what areas of the chassis/suspension needs to be upgraded from where they are on the 2010 to support the newfound 70lb/ft of torque? (HP means nothing when it comes to these types of things, you know. After all, HP is simply a made-up number derived from torque.) Is it the 31-spline axles that need to be bigger/heavier? How about the transmission crossmember? Or maybe the control arms? How is it that there are literally thousands of 2005-2010 GT's making well over 400lb/ft of torque on the current components without any notable failures in those areas? Please, enlighten us.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Ninjak...Isnt it about 350 lb (or less) gain and not 400+?

Im no expert on mustang weights but I thoght it was around 3550 (not sure on exact numbers, im no mustang expert)currently. So if the car is 3875 that would only be about a 325lb gain.

AXE... no not everyone lays awake at night worrying about faster cars but when #1 it is a mustang vs a camaro and if #2 all you have been hearing for the past month is how the mustang is going to crap on the camaro this kind of news is rather delightful to say the least lol.

[garagelogic]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Ninjak...Isnt it about 350 lb (or less) gain and not 400+?

Im no expert on mustang weights but I thoght it was around 3550 (not sure on exact numbers, im no mustang expert)currently. So if the car is 3875 that would only be about a 325lb gain.

AXE... no not everyone lays awake at night worrying about faster cars but when #1 it is a mustang vs a camaro and if #2 all you have been hearing for the past month is how the mustang is going to crap on the camaro this kind of news is rather delightful to say the least lol.

I can't recall anyone other than a die-hard Ford fan ever saying that the 2011 Mustang GT was going to "crap on the camaro". All I've heard is that the Mustang is finally going to be competitive right out of the factory. Methinks ye doth protest too much!

[SLOWHITE]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

Well, dang! I must be a hell of a driver then, because I was running mid-twelves in my stock 2007 GT500 with its measly 500hp and 1.9x 60ft times on the stock Goodyears. Oh, but then you are going to use the one instance where a 2010 GT500 and 2010 Camaro SS were compared and one beat the other by a tenth of a second to establish the idea that this is the "usual" variance of every race between the two models in the quarter mile. Please, go back to doing whatever you were doing before your other 5 posts in the forum.

Easy cheasey, I can also beat my freinds pullied, tuned, 08 convertable GT500 on the street. I've also seen a 07-09ish GT500 at the track not get out of the 13's. I've also never been beaten by a stockish 05 and up Mustang GT on the street or the track. Your mid 12 sec GT500 story is something I've never seen, so good for you. It's no mystery that Mustangs are traction challanged, that's all I'm trying to say.

[Sleestack]

Originally Posted by SLOWHITE

Easy cheasey, I can also beat my freinds pullied, tuned, 08 convertable GT500 on the street. I've also seen a 07-09ish GT500 at the track not get out of the 13's. I've also never been beaten by a stockish 05 and up Mustang GT on the street or the track. Your mid 12 sec GT500 story is something I've never seen, so good for you. It's no mystery that Mustangs are traction challanged, that's all I'm trying to say.

Here's a newsflash Einstein, all low 12 second cars are traction challenged. I have seen Camaros not get out of the high 13's at the track, but don't make the rookie mistake of assuming that is the norm, they are just getting the feel of the car. Lots of SVT forums around if you really want to find out what the GT500 runs stock, modded, etc.....

[Ninjak]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Ninjak...Isnt it about 350 lb (or less) gain and not 400+?

Im no expert on mustang weights but I thoght it was around 3550 (not sure on exact numbers, im no mustang expert)currently. So if the car is 3875 that would only be about a 325lb gain.

AXE... no not everyone lays awake at night worrying about faster cars but when #1 it is a mustang vs a camaro and if #2 all you have been hearing for the past month is how the mustang is going to crap on the camaro this kind of news is rather delightful to say the least lol.

Ok lets say its 350. Exactly WHERE does this number come from ?? I do not know the weight. But simple logic and math tells me that a car s not going to go from weighing 3550 or so, to well over 3800 lbs when it share everything from the previous car except for a few parts that has been upgraded.

Also logic tells me and fact, that my Mustang WITH a supercharger and upgraded springs, LCA's, Watts bar, and 20 inch rims, do not weigh in at 3800+ pounds. Mind you its close, I last weighed in at about 3720 or so..but I am not over. So where oh where is all this extra weight comming from ? Really I would like to see how you are comming to these figures

[SLOWHITE]

Never said a low 12 sec car wasn't traction challanged. But a 540hp high 12 sec Mustang seems to be, or it would be a low 12 sec car.

[fazm]

evan smith went 12.2 in one, and he even said that was a traction limited run.
if you want to label 12.8 as the norm in a 2010 gt500, you would have to say 13.4 is the norm in a SS.

and the fact you say your 104mph trapping suv is outrunning a 115+ trapping car is telling you something, you are beating the driver, not the car.

hell i trapped 120+ in the 1/4 and was beatin by a civic that trapped 152 lol. theres always something quicker

on topic, yes the 2011 gt will be the toughest opponent yet. it will probably run very similar times as the camaro SS, both in ET and trap

[Ninjak]

Tires. Tires are a very big part of the problems with a GT500. I live in S.FLa and at county line and Morrosso, you see people driving great times..the ones who can actually drive that is.

A poor driver will not do well in any car. If tyhat is what you see in your area, then it is what it is. But do not base that as fact on a car because people around you drive poorly.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by fazm

evan smith went 12.2 in one, and he even said that was a traction limited run.
if you want to label 12.8 as the norm in a 2010 gt500, you would have to say 13.4 is the norm in a SS.

and the fact you say your 104mph trapping suv is outrunning a 115+ trapping car is telling you something, you are beating the driver, not the car.

hell i trapped 120+ in the 1/4 and was beatin by a civic that trapped 152 lol. theres always something quicker

on topic, yes the 2011 gt will be the toughest opponent yet. it will probably run very similar times as the camaro SS, both in ET and trap

What in the hell did he have done to it?

[Milk 1027]

and.......

we're back to the same old discussions.

Thread closed