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

[Black GT]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

a decent IRS will tack on the extra poundage.

NO IRS for the Mustangs

[vernal]

As a life-long Ford person (except for an ill-fated Monte Carlo SS experiment) I think I find myself in a position to contribute here. I'm still shocked to see that I bought a Camaro, but I extensively drove the 2010 Mustang as well as an older Shelby GT500 and wound up going with the Camaro even though I knew Ford was moving back to my beloved 5.0. Since the pushrod V8 left the Ford lineup I think they have joined in the paper numbers game that all manufacturers seem to like. "Wow, 300 hp, that'll sell." Well, my 225hp 5.0 (with discrete mods but stock heads) has been beating up on those 300hp cars for years. I'm talking on the street here, not a prepped-track 1/4 mile. The peaky modular engines that Ford has been using since 96 just don't have torque until you get to about 3000 rpm, and even the lighter-than-Camaro 2010 Mustang w/3.73s didn't get up and go unless you were willing and able to keep it in the powerband. Stoplight to stoplight makes that a difficult proposition. My guess is that the new 5.0 will basically behave like a stroked 4.6. If I was to be extensively using this car on the track I might have had a decision to make, but there was no question about a daily driver. There really is no replacement for displacement unless you have a much larger budget than I do. In order to get the 3-valve Mustang to behave like it should, a roots-type supercharger is the cheapest and easiest way I could think of to make it perform like a muscle car should. Heads and cams just trade low end for high end, as a general rule, and the Mustang already didn't have enough low end. 4.10s might have helped there too, but the steepest gear that Ford offers off the showroom floor is 3.73 and 4.10s would start to eliminate the "better mileage" argument. When you factor in budgetary constraints, in order to make the Mustang right in my eyes it would have cost close to the GT500. The Camaro comes from the factory that way, and for $15,000 less. If I want the Camaro to run with the GT500 I just have to supercharge it too, and I will still wind up having spent less money for more power. I'm guessing a centrifugal would be a treat on the Camaro once the exhaust gets opened up because of the torque already present, and they still cost about half the roots-type and are still probably easier to install. I do think the Mustang handles a little better, but handling is a lot cheaper and easier to change than the engine. You can't really put an M3 or a 911 in these discussions because the cost differential is so extreme. In my opinion, which I grant those who disagree that it is worth what you've paid to hear it, is that the Camaro gives the best bang-for-the-buck of ANY car currently made, and is an ideal platform for those of us without limitless funds to make into whatever type of car we desire.

[BowtieGuy]

Originally Posted by Black GT

NO IRS for the Mustangs

That's a shame. There's really nowhere else they can go with that solid axle. Respect for milking it as much as they did, but it's downhill from here.

[Black GT]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

That's a shame. There's really nowhere else they can go with that solid axle. Respect for milking it as much as they did, but it's downhill from here.

Or maybe Ford is just following the Golden Rule:

Keep
It
Simple
Stupid

[meanmike]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

That's a shame. There's really nowhere else they can go with that solid axle. Respect for milking it as much as they did, but it's downhill from here.

I would'nt want it in my car and neither do most from what I hear.

[KoTToN]

Originally Posted by vernal

As a life-long Ford person (except for an ill-fated Monte Carlo SS experiment) I think I find myself in a position to contribute here. I'm still shocked to see that I bought a Camaro, but I extensively drove the 2010 Mustang as well as an older Shelby GT500 and wound up going with the Camaro even though I knew Ford was moving back to my beloved 5.0. Since the pushrod V8 left the Ford lineup I think they have joined in the paper numbers game that all manufacturers seem to like. "Wow, 300 hp, that'll sell." Well, my 225hp 5.0 (with discrete mods but stock heads) has been beating up on those 300hp cars for years. I'm talking on the street here, not a prepped-track 1/4 mile. The peaky modular engines that Ford has been using since 96 just don't have torque until you get to about 3000 rpm, and even the lighter-than-Camaro 2010 Mustang w/3.73s didn't get up and go unless you were willing and able to keep it in the powerband. Stoplight to stoplight makes that a difficult proposition. My guess is that the new 5.0 will basically behave like a stroked 4.6. If I was to be extensively using this car on the track I might have had a decision to make, but there was no question about a daily driver. There really is no replacement for displacement unless you have a much larger budget than I do. In order to get the 3-valve Mustang to behave like it should, a roots-type supercharger is the cheapest and easiest way I could think of to make it perform like a muscle car should. Heads and cams just trade low end for high end, as a general rule, and the Mustang already didn't have enough low end. 4.10s might have helped there too, but the steepest gear that Ford offers off the showroom floor is 3.73 and 4.10s would start to eliminate the "better mileage" argument. When you factor in budgetary constraints, in order to make the Mustang right in my eyes it would have cost close to the GT500. The Camaro comes from the factory that way, and for $15,000 less. If I want the Camaro to run with the GT500 I just have to supercharge it too, and I will still wind up having spent less money for more power. I'm guessing a centrifugal would be a treat on the Camaro once the exhaust gets opened up because of the torque already present, and they still cost about half the roots-type and are still probably easier to install. I do think the Mustang handles a little better, but handling is a lot cheaper and easier to change than the engine. You can't really put an M3 or a 911 in these discussions because the cost differential is so extreme. In my opinion, which I grant those who disagree that it is worth what you've paid to hear it, is that the Camaro gives the best bang-for-the-buck of ANY car currently made, and is an ideal platform for those of us without limitless funds to make into whatever type of car we desire.

I think you explained everything out pretty well, and i agree with the m3 and 911 remark.

Someone came on here and said no replacement for displacement, then someone jumped in and said oh yea well the 100k 911 is faster than the 31k camaro

[VASCAR2]

That Mustang appears to have an upgraded interior but that is a very bland exterior. Only thing I liked was sequential turn signal. People comment about the Camaro interior looking cheap need to look at this Mustang. This Mustang does absolutely nothing for me. It really needs fog lights and I don't like the two antennas on the rear. I think the car just looks cheap!

[Captain Awesome]

I think I found the source for their wheels!

http://www.theautopartsshop.com/Sear...LKQALY05089U10

[bluestang50]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I think I found the source for their wheels!

http://www.theautopartsshop.com/Sear...LKQALY05089U10

Too bad the fords wheels look a hell of a lot better...

[lil_chef]

imagine what the GT will be like god i love competition

[305pride]

Originally Posted by lil_chef

imagine what the GT will be like god i love competition

right. because while they are fighting to make the better car. we get a good car no matter what we choose

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by lil_chef

imagine what the GT will be like god i love competition

I've seen what the GT looks like and don't have to imagine it.

(Hint: It's ugly)

[Black5thgen]

Electric power steering sucks. We have it on my girlfriends rolling pile of shit also known as a ford escape. There is no feedback what so ever. That is definitely a down side.

[lil_chef]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I've seen what the GT looks like and don't have to imagine it.

(Hint: It's ugly)

i actually think its very good looking, not as good as the camaro, but good.

the only electric power steering that i have ever driven was in the cobalt (i think it has EPS). and i thought it delivered alright feed back. i am expecting something outstanding from new ford especially since its going to be in a sports car