The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Huggerorange73

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...........

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-powerful.html

380rwhp seems right i dont see a problem there at all.

[Huggerorange73]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

380rwhp seems right i dont see a problem there at all.

Me either....it's the "press car" that seems off.

"380 rwhp is not a problem with respect to a 412 bhp flywheel rating. It's more a case of the press car being "healthier" than expected, which is convenient in light of the fact that it's the one that was handed out to mags so they can measure their "independently verified" 0-60 and quarter-mile times. From this comparison it seems the press car is not as good a representative sample as our own long-term car."

[ArkySS]

1.69 60'? Even with DR's that is impressive with less than 500 horses.

[Allentown]

In the same way the press car could have been tuned...their long term car could just be a bad example. That argument goes both ways.

Based on what REAL guys are getting at REAL tracks. I would say its almost more likely their long term car NEEDS a tune than it is that their press car was tuned.


http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...91-116mph.html

There are two guys in the same thread who got 12.1s with just an intake, tune and exhaust. (one had a little suspension mods to). I was digging through my posts from last year and saw sarcasm from the camaro guys that the 11 couldn't be "a 12 second car" in quotes..just like that. How much is an intake tune and exhaust? In the neighborhood of $1,000 and they are knocking on the door of being in the 11s. There is really no point in questioning a) if it is detuned from the factory as it obviously is and b) if they are underrated from the factory. Of course the nice thing about underrating...even the "bad examples" will still make the advertised mark.

Regarding hybrids, Volvo announced a 285hp diesel hybrid wagon that gets 124mpg that i would buy in a HEART beat. Nearly 300hp, its AWD (battery runs rear diesel engine runs front) and 124mpg in a sensible wagon platform that could probably replace your suv but drive more like a car?

Sign me up. But yea..i wouldnt get a prius or insight. I would however get one of the VW diesel models that pushes into the 50mpg range also.

[Black5thgen]

Originally Posted by Huggerorange73

Me either....it's the "press car" that seems off.

"380 rwhp is not a problem with respect to a 412 bhp flywheel rating. It's more a case of the press car being "healthier" than expected, which is convenient in light of the fact that it's the one that was handed out to mags so they can measure their "independently verified" 0-60 and quarter-mile times. From this comparison it seems the press car is not as good a representative sample as our own long-term car."

Impossible, haven't you learned in the mustang universe that the lower HP and slower cars are the exception and not the norm. There are no problems with the test fleet cars, it's the thousands of productions cars that are "off" at time of testing.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Huggerorange73

Me either....it's the "press car" that seems off.

"380 rwhp is not a problem with respect to a 412 bhp flywheel rating. It's more a case of the press car being "healthier" than expected, which is convenient in light of the fact that it's the one that was handed out to mags so they can measure their "independently verified" 0-60 and quarter-mile times. From this comparison it seems the press car is not as good a representative sample as our own long-term car."

380rwhp off the show room floor!! i imagine itll make more once its broken in like the press car was.

its not like inside line did a test thats not gonna have variables. they knew the conspiracy theorists would come out which is why theres hardly any information besides the final results. anyways i liked this post on that page that was a reply to the one you quoted and of course, there was no response to it.....


"1. What were the ambient conditions in both cases?
2. What did the uncorrected results look like in both cases?
3. What is the run to run variation in both cases and in general for this dyno? Re-test an identical car that you dynoed from that timeframe if possible to get more data on this.
4. Is the dynos calibration up to date for all runs? I assume yes, but there is some tolerance here which may be contributing.
5. Were all runs completed in the same gear?
6. Did you take a fuel sample and analyze it in both cases?
7. I assume air filters were in similar condition and same oil type was used (factory fill), but you never know until analyzing...

Another thing to consider is that the media car's 1750 miles were probably all at the track, so that car was probably more "broken in" than your car with 1450 miles on it for whatever that's worth.

The conspiracy theory makes for a good headline, but there's so many variables to consider that I don't know that you can claim the difference to be "statistically significant" until some of the questions above are answered and you ensure your measurement system is robust. It would be nice if you could have uploaded the calibrations from both cars to confirm there were no changes (relevant to torque output). "

[Black5thgen]

Regarding mileage:

At the time of testing, the car from the media intro had 1,750 miles on the clock to our 1,451.

[sik68]

Originally Posted by ArkySS

1.69 60'? Even with DR's that is impressive with less than 500 horses.

+1 The driver is obviously really good, and has set the bar high right out of the gate for the Boss.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Black5thgen

Impossible, haven't you learned in the mustang universe that the lower HP and slower cars are the exception and not the norm. There are no problems with the test fleet cars, it's the thousands of productions cars that are "off" at time of testing.

ummmmmm.....380rwhp is still a good number and within range of the norm and still more than ive seen any stock LS3 Camaro put to the wheels. i still dont see a problem here?? how much more power were you expecting

i swear its like some of you guys just WANT to argue about anything and then blame the "other clan" when you get a response.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Black5thgen

Regarding mileage:

and were they both treated exactly the same for that amount of miles???

[Georgie]

how much do you guys think this thing will jump w/ a tune+cai, maybe catback (no O/R)? 390whp?

also from what i'm reading 3.73s aren't worth it?

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Georgie

how much do you guys think this thing will jump w/ a tune+cai, maybe catback (no O/R)? 390whp??

those mods are putting them at about 405rwhp

Originally Posted by Georgie

also from what i'm reading 3.73s aren't worth it?

depends on other things like what tires you plan on running and what your future mods list looks like. stockish, i think 3.31 or 3.55 is best.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Toyaholic

How much does the new Boss weigh?

....

i think theyre about 3600-3650 if i remember correctly

[Bad70supreme]

That will NOT be the norm, and if you put DRs on a stock V6 I dont think there will be any improvement. They dont have enough power, it will hook and bog... guys with stock SS's are already having this problem running stickys!