The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by mjf6866

i love seeing the modern muscle car wars in full swing!

its been said time and time again, but isnt it nice to have 3 musclecars to choose from again? there always will be the "showroom stock" wars that they can advertise, but so many people getting all worked up over a few tenths in 1/4mi times when any of them can be made faster than the other. all 3 have solid base powerplants to mod away so it just depending on what you can/want to spend to go faster than the next guy.

once the camaro went away in '02, with no offerings from Chrysler...never thought i would be able to take part in MCWII (muscle car wars 2). just be happy guys.

It isn't into full swing until the Z/28 gets here. MAKE IT NOW GM.

[esperman]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

Post your dyno sheets then, show me these lower gear run's that you've done.


dyno's DO NOT read tq and factor in HP. it's the opposite. Otherwise a car with better rear end gears would always dyno higher. and that is not the case. If you leave off the ignition source to read RPM, the dyno will still pick up what the HP is, it just can't calculate tq, and will print out an HP graph based on speed (MPH).

another example is if a car reads 300 rwtq on a 1:1 ratio, then if the dyno really did go off of rwtq, a gear ratio of 1.4:1 would read 420 rwtq. I don't see any dyno graphs being anywhere near that off. Do you? if so, please post.

4th gear or whatever 1:1 is is generally used because it has the least parasitic losses (higher rwhp) and it also gets the best reading.


EDITED to remove some harshness.

just to back up mrray13 he's been a beta tester for Trifecta Tune, ARH & Nallen Racing. His dyno sheets & MODS have been well documented on this forum.

regardless of the science behind dynos & why they vary so much between different machine results, the LLT has posted higher gains in 3rd compared to 4th gear.

[mrray13]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

EDITED to remove some harshness.

Wasn't needed. No offense was taken. If I'm wrong on how it works, I'm wrong, no biggie. I'll argue the results, as I have dyno sheets in front of me that back up what I'm saying.

Besides, there's nothing wrong in learning. Again, I'll argue the horspower can't truly be measured, it's derived from torque. All my reading says this in one way or another. It's a mathmatical guess, based off torque, which can be measured. For while we have a constant to relate to getting horspower from torque/rpm, that constant is just an accepted standard, based on what a person judged the amount of force a horse could generate. I've not seen anything that says that constant was ever verified, but rather, I have seen text that states there are different opinions on just how much that force could/should be.

Then again, I could be wrong, lol.

BTW, thanks esperman

[mjf6866]

Originally Posted by a_Username

It isn't into full swing until the Z/28 gets here. MAKE IT NOW GM.

well, look at today's mustang news as the suprise attack at Pearl Harbor

its gonna heat up quick!

[esperman]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

ford had a 305 hp V8 in their mustang about 15 years ago, when did the camaro go over 300 from the factory?

1996 Mustang GT had 215 hp stock.
1996 Camaro SS had 285 hp stock.
ONLY the 1996 SVT Cobra had 305 hp (but not really comparable based on price)

The 1997 SS 30th Anniversary had 330 hp (but again not really comparable based on price)

The 1998 Z-28 had roughly 350 hp stock (it was underrated at 305hp)
The 1998 SS had 330 hp stock

[esperman]

Originally Posted by mrray13

BTW, thanks esperman

just keeping it Smurphy

[esperman]

Originally Posted by duder4thgen

I think Fords biggest success here is the v6, those are amazing times for a base model.

I agree. The base Mustang presents a great performance value...and will really shock an unprepared 05-09 GT driver!

[Milk 1027]

I'm thinking of picking up a 5.0 a few years down the road. Just for the fun of it.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Milk 1027

I'm thinking of picking up a 5.0 a few years down the road. Just for the fun of it.

Dude, I bet the other mods are plotting to relieve you of your duties after that statement.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by esperman

I agree. The base Mustang presents a great performance value...and will really shock an unprepared 05-09 GT driver!

Isn't that 13.7 time RIGHT at the 05-09 GT's toes?

[Zeus]

Why is the general consensus that GM is going to up the performance on the 2011 to 'beat' the GT?


Is there any evidence at all to suggest that they are doing anything to the performance?

[Chiefstang]

Originally Posted by Dirtdog

The best part is the Camaro was built to be compared to itself, the 2011 Mustang was built to be compared to the Camaro.

My first post here, and I HAD to start with that qoute. Sorry Dirtdog, but you are never allowed to say that the Mustang was built to compete with the Camaro. Ever.

That being said, I'll look forward to chatting with you guys! Seems like a pretty civil group, and we can at least agree about the taste of rice, it seems.

[Milk 1027]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Dude, I bet the other mods are plotting to relieve you of your duties after that statement.

meh.

I've always been a car fan first. They know that.
But if you must know.
My preferance is
1. GM
2. All other American cars
3. BMW, Porche, Mercedes

4. Might consider imports if I really like them.


in other words if I can afford a Z28 in a few years I'll get one instead of a 5.0 mustang.

Originally Posted by Zeus

Why is the general consensus that GM is going to up the performance on the 2011 to 'beat' the GT?


Is there any evidence at all to suggest that they are doing anything to the performance?

They already stated they are planning to beat out the V6 mustang. Why not bump up the SS power as well.

[esperman]

Originally Posted by Chiefstang

you are never allowed to say that the Mustang was built to compete with the Camaro. Ever.

them's fighting words

J/K. Welcome to the forum. Most of us respect all types of cars.