The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[2SSARMY]

I got a jet engine on my camaro. Good luck beating me

[DeathChill]

Anyways, so with trap speeds this close, what happens if both cars got good traction (e.g. Drag radials)? I am honestly curious.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

Anyways, so with trap speeds this close, what happens if both cars got good traction (e.g. Drag radials)? I am honestly curious.

Should favor the stang. Lighter weight + gearing.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Should favor the stang. Lighter weight + gearing.

I meant in general. If two cars are getting the same trap speed, isn't traction the determining factor? I don't know so I figured I'd ask!

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

I meant in general. If two cars are getting the same trap speed, isn't traction the determining factor? I don't know so I figured I'd ask!

Yes you are generally correct.

[Den4176]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

Yeah well today I counted 1,468,203 mustangs. 489 Challengers and 13 camaros.

All the mustangs were v6s and driven by menopausal women.

lmao..

[assasinator]

thats a complex question.

gearing differences
vehicle weights
instantaneous torque----torque for each moment in time.

0-10mph
10-20mph
etc.

my personal guess is the first 100 feet will decide it. both cars trap close. power to weight is very close.

[Gunsmoke]

Originally Posted by Revo1

Steering wheel and shift knob put Camaro in 3rd place...

Just lost respect for Motor Trend

Originally Posted by Unfair

wow... lol at least read the article man.
it's simple mechanics that it would be faster with less weight.

Originally Posted by CG'sSS

First of all I think this way funny....being that not so long ago the Mustang GT got beat out by the Camaro SS so bad that there were complaints that it shouldnt be considered in the same comparison....so they ended up comparing the Camaro SS to the Mustang GT500...now they say the camaro is last...

Originally Posted by Zeus

The Mustang has a much better power/weigh ratio. Why is it hard to believe?

Originally Posted by Stew

oooooooooook Where are you seeing 11 GTs with the new 5.0 running to know they wouldn't run that? THeir times have been pretty close with all the tests I have seen for average times. You like your car right? Why so butthurt?

not butthurt, i'm saying i'm very familiar with fords motors, i've raced them for years. and i would bet any amount of money that they will still lose the ls3, stock for stock. i love competition and am glad ford finally stepped up their cars, finally. but how is it the unblown 5.0 dohc motor is gonna run the same time as the supercharged 5.4 in the shelby? power vs. weight, yes i'm very familiar, but still not buying it. peak torque @4250 right? tell you what, when i had a 4.6 dohc sc in its early stage, making 415rwhp @ 3200lbs., i was still getting beat by ls1's with a cam and bolt ons. 302 or 281, still gonna be similar results. i call it how i see it.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke

but how is it the unblown 5.0 dohc motor is gonna run the same time as the supercharged 5.4 in the shelby?

The reason the GT is able to run close to the times the Motor Trend and others got for the 2010 GT500 is because of traction.

With nothing more than a tire a 2010 GT500 went 11.592@118.45. The GT will not get close to that. Even on a tire.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by assasinator

thats a complex question.

gearing differences
vehicle weights
instantaneous torque----torque for each moment in time.

0-10mph
10-20mph
etc.

my personal guess is the first 100 feet will decide it. both cars trap close. power to weight is very close.

In the race it will probably come down to the r/t to be honest. And yes the first 60ft are always very very important and the first 100 feet is where the race is won or lost in this match up.

[Gunsmoke]

true that sax, i totally agree. all i'm saying is that i think MT is full of ish and i'll give the new 5.0 their props when i see it beat a maro. don't get me wrong, that five oh is a hot ass motor and wish i had that as a starting platform years ago. but do you guys really think that MT isn't trying to hype up the stangs by hammering on the camaro? there's many reasons i switched sides. know what i mean?

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by Gunsmoke

true that sax, i totally agree. all i'm saying is that i think MT is full of ish and i'll give the new 5.0 their props when i see it beat a maro. don't get me wrong, that five oh is a hot ass motor and wish i had that as a starting platform years ago. but do you guys really think that MT isn't trying to hype up the stangs by hammering on the camaro? there's many reasons i switched sides. know what i mean?

The only thing we have to go on right now is the MT test and yes it was biased. Just like when the SS came out. They played it up much the same way.

I still want to see production '11 GTs and the numbers people get out of them.

But for MT to get a 12.7 @ 111mph out of the GT, when they can't drive a lick, shows the car is definitely quick.

I hate mag racing but that is about the only thing we can go on right now. And multiple places testing the 2011 GT got better times than they did when they tested the 2010 SS. Not a fair comparison because it wasn't the same day or track.

It will really come down to the driver. But the GT should have the advantage, if just ever so slightly.

[Mr CLuTcH]

I've just watched both reviews from Motor Trend, one from when they first reviewed the 2010 SS vs the Challenger and 2010 Mustang GT, and the other from now with the 2010 SS and Challenger SRT8 vs 2011 Mustang GT...and what I've came to find is that, Motor Trend is totally bias and full of s***. They're comparison data for each car is way off, and they totally put they're foot in they're own mouths when you review they're before and after comments.

Let's review some of them......

Braking

In they're current review of the 2010 Camaro SS vs the 2011 Mustang GT, they score the Camaro SS breaking during this review as

Braking: 60-0 (108ft) Mustang- 60-0 (104ft)

Yet when Motor Trend first did they're comparison of the 2010 SS it's braking from 60-0 was then scored at 60-0(105ft). So what I'd like to know is how in the hell does the Camaro SS' braking score go from 105ft with brembos equipped THEN to "108ft" with brembos equipped NOW? I mean, are they're testers holding back on the brakes to achieve a higher number for the Mustang's sake? When considering the SS' true braking distance was 105ft to the 2011 Mustang's 104ft, that's not a significant difference; with the same brakes equipped, that puts the Camaro SS' braking and the new 2011 Mustang's braking at "nearly" even numbers with the Mustang stopping only 1 foot shorter than the Camaro which is heavier. Wow.

Interior


"The interior is quite nice on this Camaro too, the materials a little higher grade than the Mustangs(2010); very well executed. Maybe not quite as overtly stylish as the Ford but you gotta admire the way GM has put this car together. All in all a very impressive interior. "-Motor Trend (FIRST REVIEW of the Big 3)

"The styling, while it's really popular, alot of people are snapping cell phone pictures, ....since it's in transformers yellow and everything, but it exacts quite a huge price on the interior, the windows are very small, and visibility out...in all directions is POOR, the pillars are very wide. I mean, theres other things like, the steering wheel rim is very THICK, and the shifter knob is OVER SIZED. All those kind of features, make me feel small. And I don't want my "muscle car" to make me feel small. All these things combined make most editors believe, they rather not own this car. And that's what put it in 3rd place...."-Motor Trend (2011 Mustang vs Camaro Vs Challenger Review)

Oh so basically, back then the Camaro SS was an amazingly impressive car, but now, "people are only snapping pictures because it's in transformers yellow". WOW,.....wtf. Motor Trend should totally remove this guy from reviewing anything. I mean,the 2010 Camaro has been out for quite a while now, and STILL I have people snapping pictures and going nuts at gas stations even though my car is in Silver Ice Metallic. I totally feel like Motor Trend is bias and purposely bashing the Camaro only to make the 2011 Mustang look better than it really is in an attempt to ignite a war between enthusiast, when it really shouldn't be any of that. Cars are only great in light of what they can do for it's consumer. Motor Trend totally "flip flops" the Camaro when during they're first review they couldn't get enough of it.

But the 2011 Mustang's interior is exactly the same as the 2010 Mustang, and what do you know, so is it's exterior styling. Oh wait,....a glass roof?! That's different! What else!? The 2011 Mustang has the exact same styling as the 2010, nothing has changed about the car except that Ford has added a "5.0" badge and gave it a new engine which equals otherwise better performance; oh my goodness that's so dramatically different from the other Mustangs you've produced that still travel the road like robots. Looks wise, it's still in the dumps. The 2010 Camaro has won World Best Car Design Of The Year Award, yet the Mustang didn't even make it into the finals. I'm wondering, has any Mustang ever won that type of award? But Motor Trend is going to score the Camaro 3rd in comparison to the other 2 cars? No one wonder they're subscription is only 10 dollars. It's probably so cheap because they're opinions are at times....worthless. No matter how "visually retro" the challenger may looks, it pales in comparison to the 2010 Camaro looks wise, the 2010 Camaro deserves at least second place. Better yet, I would have still given it first considering the performance of the new Mustang and Camaro is so close.

1/4 Mile
In the new 2011 Mustang Comparison, Motor Trend scores the Mustang in the 1/4 mile as:

12.7 @111.3MPH

YET......

They scored the Camaro SS at 13.1@ 110.8MPH

But during they're first review the Camaro SS scored 13.0 flat at 111.0MPH
So let me get this straight, the 2011 Mustang can pull a 12.7@111.3mph but the Camaro can run 3 tenths slower at the same speed (111.0) and have a significantly lower quarter mile time with 13.0? Someone please explain that to me. I think in reality, the 2011 Mustang GT and 2010 SS are almost dead even performance wise, it's soo a drivers race. I refuse to believe the Mustang GT scored that high in the quarter mile over the SS while trapping the same speed as the SS in they're first review. Other sites scored the 3 cars in what would seem to be unbiased, but Motor Trend went way overboard with they're times, test, and some of the statements they made towards each car, especially the Camaro. I suggest everyone stay far way from Motor Trends reviews, the best car is heavily based on "what's in" the now. So that means, even if your car has nearly the same performance as a newer model car of a different make, they're going to give the win to the newer car, ......simply because "it's new".

[Sax1031]

Mr Clutch you can't expect a car to perform the exact same day in and day out. To many variables. None of the numbers are far enough off for them to show significant sand bagging.

And interiors are subjective for the most part. I don't argue those. Either interior is nice and a personal preference.