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

[AZ MSCL]

Originally Posted by scrming

How is a fully loaded 2010 GT $8K less than your 2LT/RS? Quick search of the local Ford dealers inventory showed one 2010 GT and it was $36,400... Stick on my 2LT/RS was just over $30K...

Our fully loaded 2010 GT was stickered at $39,000+. With all the rebates and internet pricing, we paid about $31,000. The interior (especially with the electronics package) is amazing. The navigation/stereo unit is the best I've seen. Very comfortable car, very quick off the line - it reminds me a lot of the Camaro SS (except at higher speeds).

Why is everyone so worried about the 2011 Mustangs? This same discussion is going on at the Challenger forums. There's already a Mustang that will beat the Camaro and Challenger called the GT500. I can drop a Ford Racing S/C in my 2010 GT and make 475 rwhp. There is always something faster out there. Hell, Mr. Norm's is producing a 900 rwhp Challenger. I'm sure there will be Camaros out there that will do the same. Bottom line: If you through enough money at it, you can get enough HP for 3 cars. For the "purists" who only consider cars that are "stock," money wise, you'll either pay for it when you buy it (bigger engines, S/Cs) or later using mods. The HP thing is silly to argue about, there will always be something with more.

[1320junkie]

Come to the fest inspect the cars and witnes the runs..all there is to it


the party was great

[tommygun6644]

Competition is never a bad thing. I personally HOPE Ford (and I wish Dodge) would step it up. All it would do is coerce GM into improving.

While GM, Ford and Dodge are in competition with each other the real competition for us are the import drivers and ricers, IMO.

[AZ MSCL]

Originally Posted by 2SSARME

my f16 is faster

Yeah? Let's see your dyno sheet.

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by tommygun6644

Competition is never a bad thing. I personally HOPE Ford (and I wish Dodge) would step it up. All it would do is coerce GM into improving.

While GM, Ford and Dodge are in competition with each other the real competition for us are the import drivers and ricers, IMO.

Dodge is. The 2011 SRT8 Challengers are getting the 6.4L with between 450 and 500 HP and similar Tq numbers.

They're also getting a new 6 speed auto.

The R/T's are supposedly staying with the 5.7L Hemi that they have now but the word around our circles is that in 2012 they'll be getting a power boost to make them "offically" 400, its a fairly clearly known fact that the 5.7L's in the R/T's are way under-rated publically and that they're likely putting out closer to 400 already.

[King T]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Dodge is. The 2011 SRT8 Challengers are getting the 6.4L with between 450 and 500 HP and similar Tq numbers.

They're also getting a new 6 speed auto.

The R/T's are supposedly staying with the 5.7L Hemi that they have now but the word around our circles is that in 2012 they'll be getting a power boost to make them "offically" 400, its a fairly clearly known fact that the 5.7L's in the R/T's are way under-rated publically and that they're likely putting out closer to 400 already.

True. The 5.7 Hemi in the Ram is putting out 390hp now, so a couple of tweaks would put it up to 400 easily.

Plus don't forget about the "Pentastar" 3.6L V6 that will be replacing the old 3.5L. The new 3.6 is suppose to make from 280-300 hp.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/13/c...-pentastar-v6/

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Dodge is. The 2011 SRT8 Challengers are getting the 6.4L with between 450 and 500 HP and similar Tq numbers.

They're also getting a new 6 speed auto.

The R/T's are supposedly staying with the 5.7L Hemi that they have now but the word around our circles is that in 2012 they'll be getting a power boost to make them "offically" 400, its a fairly clearly known fact that the 5.7L's in the R/T's are way under-rated publically and that they're likely putting out closer to 400 already.

Not really, since every conceivable test performed on the Challenger R/T has them not putting out nearly as much RWHP as they should be and failing about every test for too much weight and horrible body roll. 500HP Challenger. Ahh, yeah...right. It is no secret I hate the hell out of Challengers. So plain, bland, lame wheels, carbon copy of the 70's model and the quality is still Dodge. Lamer than Ford and nowhere near GM. Seriously, this car shouldn't even be in the same conversation when talking about Mustangs, let alone Camaros. Dodge will continue to show poor innovation and quality as they always have and yup, I could give less than a squirt a piss if it has a HEMI or not. HEMI? Sorry. Not impressed one bit. I hope they scrap that lousy Cherokee SRT8 as well. POS.

Viper, when you get some real solid information, I'd be interested to hear it because the hype and pure speculation you are working up here isn't worth very much.

[tommygun6644]

Originally Posted by DkknightX

Not really, since every conceivable test performed on the Challenger R/T has them not putting out nearly as much RWHP as they should be and failing about every test for too much weight and horrible body roll. 500HP Challenger. Ahh, yeah...right. It is no secret I hate the hell out of Challengers. So plain, bland, lame wheels, carbon copy of the 70's model and the quality is still Dodge. Lamer than Ford and nowhere near GM. Seriously, this car shouldn't even be in the same conversation when talking about Mustangs, let alone Camaros. Dodge will continue to show poor innovation and quality as they always have and yup, I could give less than a squirt a piss if it has a HEMI or not. HEMI? Sorry. Not impressed one bit. I hope they scrap that lousy Cherokee SRT8 as well. POS.

Viper, when you get some real solid information, I'd be interested to hear it because the hype and pure speculation you are working up here isn't worth very much.

Play nice


Challengers are nice. However there are reasons why I didn't buy one. If what Viper says turns out to be true, good for Dodge.

Until then


I do and will awknowledge when Ford and Dodge make good cars though. I can't say the same for overpriced imports though.

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by tommygun6644

Play nice


Challengers are nice. However there are reasons why I didn't buy one. If what Viper says turns out to be true, good for Dodge.

Until then


I do and will awknowledge when Ford and Dodge make good cars though. I can't say the same for overpriced imports though.

I'll behave. Arg! I hate Dodge! Nothing but problems!

[Axe]

Love the Challenger. Beautiful car.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Mhoward08

Since the new mustang will weigh just about as much as the camaro now with all the things their adding on. The 24 hp and 40 ft of torque loss will surely hurt the mustang. Can only wonder what the price of the new gt will be ....

Where did you get this from? the new stang will weight as much as the camaro? REALLY? LOL you guys crack me up..
I will quote you for future reference, thanks

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

Where did you get this from? the new stang will weight as much as the camaro? REALLY? LOL you guys crack me up..
I will quote you for future reference, thanks

Since you know so much, why don't you tell us how much it will weigh so we can quote you later?

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by 2SSARME

Pretty sure the only reason people would buy a mustang instead of a camaro, besides fanboy-ism, is that the mustang is cheaper and more affordable.

A few million people like to save some money huh? because there is absolutely no reason to ever buy a mustang. lol

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by SWAT 79

This is very true, and the one thing I don't like about the mustang, it is a small motor, that doesn't respond as well to bolt-ons as the gm motors do except if there is a tune, which more or less makes up the difference between the two for the mustang (proportionally, not actually). If it was up to me, I would get a mustang with an ls3, still with a live axle tho.


The positive for ford however, is that they have always done more with less, and the fact that the 2010 mustang with only 315 hp and 325 lb ft of torque can keep up with the camaro (on average times, it does, I don't need any magazine comparo's) is a testament to that, which is makes me wonder what the deal is with the 5.0. For once, its more powerful (more or less), but I think it will personally weigh more then the current 2010's, and not be as effective in putting the power to the ground. Ford's talent has always been doing more with less, so I am skeptical to the new decisions, as if they are geared only to the commercials so they can say they have more power and more mpgs.

on the contrary, once again i must use my most used line "WHERE DID YOU HEAR THAT?" because the 3 valve 4.6 has been one of the most bolt on friendly engines ford has put out since the 5.0.. so "where did you hear that they aren't friendly to bolt on's?" is my dyno lying to me? did i just make a pretend 20+ HP from a cold air intake? or a pretend 10+ from underdrive pulleys? or a pretend 15+ from cmcv delete plates? or a pretend 20+ hp from long tubes? or a pretend 25+ hp from an off road x-pipe? these things must not be bolt on's or don't exist in real life? where are we getting this mystical horsepower from if 4.6 don't do well with bolt on's?