The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

they can drive just fine, its just that there arent many 5.0 owners on that board. Both cars have had excellent conditions to run their cars in (the camaro even more so since it came out earlier) so you cant just say the 5.0 runs their times because of the conditions and not have it be the same case for the camaro.
I dont understand why you refuse to believe anything though. Someone here on camaro5 even traded in their camaro and got a new 5.0 and his times went from 13.4@107mph in the camaro to 12.8@111mph in the mustang. even with equal launch, using those trap speeds the mustang in this case would have been about 4tenths faster still. I know there have been reports of a camaro trapping as high as 112mph stock but on the same side of that token there has been posts of people (from this board even) witnessing a stock 5.0 trapping 114-115mph.

Evil I don't have a problem with believing at some point the Camaro or the 5.0 ran a 12:50. I have a problem with you Ford guys who come in here claiming that the 5.0 is a mid 12 second car when that is not the case for 99.9% of the 5.0s out there. The same crap was being posted about the 11 GT500 being a 11:20 car and also the Camaro being a 12:50 car. Along the same lines that the Terminator was capable of 12:40s stock.

I see by your signature you are a Terminator owner or were at somepoint. I was also sold it to buy the SS. Now that car was a true mid to low 12-second car (lightly modded) and it would absolutely destroy a stock SS, and 5.0.

I hope you would agree with me that neither the Camaro or 5.0 is a mid 12-second car for 99% of the cars out there.

BTW post some pics of your Terminator, it always has been my favorite Mustang.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Evil I don't have a problem with believing at some point the Camaro or the 5.0 ran a 12:50. I have a problem with you Ford guys who come in here claiming that the 5.0 is a mid 12 second car when that is not the case for 99.9% of the 5.0s out there. The same crap was being posted about the 11 GT500 being a 11:20 car and also the Camaro being a 12:50 car. Along the same lines that the Terminator was capable of 12:40s stock.

I see by your signature you are a Terminator owner or were at somepoint. I was also sold it to buy the SS. Now that car was a true mid to low 12-second car (lightly modded) and it would absolutely destroy a stock SS, and 5.0.

I hope you would agree with me that neither the Camaro or 5.0 is a mid 12-second car for 99% of the cars out there.

BTW post some pics of your Terminator, it always has been my favorite Mustang.

ill see if i can dig up pics of my car.

as far as the mustang being a mid 12 car. its certainly capable of it, but people also consider 12.7 to be "mid 12's" so maybe its just a difference in paradygms. a 5.0 should be considered a high 12 car IMO (12.7-12.8) and the camaro a low low 13 car (13.0-13.1) with pretty good drivers in average conditions.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

but people also consider 12.7 to be "mid 12's" so maybe its just a difference in paradygms. a 5.0 should be considered a high 12 car IMO (12.7-12.8) and the camaro a low low 13 car (13.0-13.1) with pretty good drivers in average conditions.

No, 5.0 and SS are both running 12.8-13.1 average across the board

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

No, 5.0 and SS are both running 12.8-13.1 average across the board

not from what ive seen, but its not worth arguing about so ill just pretent to agree.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I guess none of the 5.0 guys in the SVT forum know how to drive their cars since they are only running what I posted, maybe they need instructions? Lets put a SS on a prepped track, with mine shaft conditions, and a shoe in driver, lets remove the front sway bar, maybe a little trunk weight (heck maybe sneak in a tune also) then go run a 12:50 then proclaim to the world that the 2010/11 SS is a mid 12 second car.

There you go again suggesting they can't run mid 12s without cheating. Maybe it's your google skills that are lacking, not the guys on svt forum, or maybe it's because not a lot of 5.0 guys will join an svt specific forum. Whether you want to believe it or not, it's an absolute fact that the car is capable of mid 12s in bone stock form, nothing removed, no tire changes. Like I said, that doesn't mean every driver is capable of it, but the car is.

The problem isn't that anyone is saying every driver will run mid 12's, I don't think anyone has said anything like that, and if you can post a quote that says that, I'll eat my words. The problem is, every time someone says it can do mid 12s, you come out and start whining about how that's not what the average driver will do (again, who said it was?!) and how they must be modded because it can't be possible stock. The truth of the matter is, we discuss best times because it gives us an idea of what the car is capable of, if we really went by true averages, the camaro and mustang would be addressed as mid-13 second cars because in reality, most people can't drive. But, if someone came in here and said the camaro was a mid 13 second car, what would you do? Cite mid-high 12 second runs, am I right?

So you're dancing around what you really want to say. Do you think these people are lying about being stock or not, because I can show you multiple instances of stock 5.0s running mid 12s on stock tires and some of them have multiple witnesses.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

There you go again suggesting they can't run mid 12s without cheating. Maybe it's your google skills that are lacking, not the guys on svt forum, or maybe it's because not a lot of 5.0 guys will join an svt specific forum. Whether you want to believe it or not, it's an absolute fact that the car is capable of mid 12s in bone stock form, nothing removed, no tire changes. Like I said, that doesn't mean every driver is capable of it, but the car is.

The problem isn't that anyone is saying every driver will run mid 12's, I don't think anyone has said anything like that, and if you can post a quote that says that, I'll eat my words. The problem is, every time someone says it can do mid 12s, you come out and start whining about how that's not what the average driver will do (again, who said it was?!) and how they must be modded because it can't be possible stock. The truth of the matter is, we discuss best times because it gives us an idea of what the car is capable of, if we really went by true averages, the camaro and mustang would be addressed as mid-13 second cars because in reality, most people can't drive. But, if someone came in here and said the camaro was a mid 13 second car, what would you do? Cite mid-high 12 second runs, am I right?

So you're dancing around what you really want to say. Do you think these people are lying about being stock or not, because I can show you multiple instances of stock 5.0s running mid 12s on stock tires and some of them have multiple witnesses.

------------------------------------------------------------------

OK I visited two more Ford forums, Modular Fords, and the Corral. I can count the number of 12:50 or faster on one hand. A guy named Uncle something claimed 12:40s and another claimed 12:18, so I still stand by what I said above, 99% of 5.0 owners will never see 12:50 stock, same goes for the Camaro. Again bolt on some tires and it's much more likely. To answer your question do I think these folks are lying maybe, maybe not, it sure wouldn't be the first time a racer has lied about being stock, this has been going on since the 60s. These days with the big hp gains from an e-mailed tune you never even know its there. Under the right conditions maybe these E/Ts are possible.

I think the fastest time posted for a stock SS is 12:50s, what do you think the reactions would be on the Ford forums if that kept being brought up by SS owners there, I am certain nobody would question that time right... LOL

I'll bury it here and promise never to question again any posted stock times.

[ffrcobra_65]

newmoon, you ever seen Jeff Dunham and Peanut?

[Camaro_hx]

Lets bring Jeremy Clarkson into the scene.. i'd love to hear what he has to say in comparison LOL

[Black5thgen]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

not from what ive seen, but its not worth arguing about so ill just pretent to agree.

The best I've seen a 5.0 run at the track was 13.4, same exact time as the L99 SS at the track that day.

I'm sure they are capable of high 12's but it's not a give in that they will turn that number. I have also witnessed a bone stock L99 run a 12.9

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

not from what ive seen, but its not worth arguing about so ill just pretent to agree.

Yeah. I'd say the 5.0 averages about a 12.9-13.1 while the LS3 averages 13.1-13.3 and L99 13.2-13.5).

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Yeah. I'd say the 5.0 averages about a 12.9-13.1 while the LS3 averages 13.1-13.3 and L99 13.2-13.5).

I definately agree with you.... but this is not what Sawyer is sayin.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by Black5thgen

The best I've seen a 5.0 run at the track was 13.4, same exact time as the L99 SS at the track that day.

I'm sure they are capable of high 12's but it's not a give in that they will turn that number. I have also witnessed a bone stock L99 run a 12.9

The best I have seen a LS3 run was a 14.2. I am sure they are capable of mid 13s though.

[Black5thgen]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

The best I have seen a LS3 run was a 14.2. I am sure they are capable of mid 13s though.

So your saying an LS3 is only capable of mid 13's??

Originally Posted by a_Username

Yeah. I'd say the 5.0 averages about a 12.9-13.1 while the LS3 averages 13.1-13.3 and L99 13.2-13.5).

I disagree, I say the 5.0 and LS3 both average 12.9-13.1 and the L99 is 13.1-13.4

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by Black5thgen

So your saying an LS3 is only capable of mid 13's??

Yes until I see otherwise it has to be true.