The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[HIGHOCTANE]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

if you raced someone on the street, did you just start from second gear? anyways I think the Supra 3.0 I6 brought insane power levels to the street and a few years later the 4.6 DOHC made insane power levels attainable to the common adult.

I don't street race...
I had 315 Hoosiers on the car and as soon as the boost came on,even on low boost, in 1st it would just blow them. In the above vid(2nd one) it is breaking the tires loose in 2nd when the boost comes on...at 19psi it would break them loos in 3rd when the boost came on..
The car really needed an auto to be a good track car...
The car was FUN...and to everyone who rode in it is was SCARY fast...I actually made someone cry,seriously bawling like a baby, during a 2nd gear pull in that car...lol..priceless

[thebrander]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

Low end torque isnt much of an advantage if youre running street tires. Theres only so much of it that is needed at the lower rpms, especially in a lighter car. And if you have a manual tranny car, you can just launch it at the rpm you want. So if you want to launch it at peak torque you can, even if its in the higher rpms.

... unless you're a roadracer like myself. The low-end torque is a great blessing to have so that you're not having to carry the RPM's through the turns. Roadracing is also the argument for staying NA. Heaksoak kills power halfway through your session.

(not that anyway here probably cares, just pointing out that I'm truly unbiased about how easy it is to FI the 5.0's and LS3's because I have absolutely no desire to do so)

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by HIGHOCTANE

I don't street race...
I had 315 Hoosiers on the car and as soon as the boost came on,even on low boost, in 1st it would just blow them. In the above vid(2nd one) it is breaking the tires loose in 2nd when the boost comes on...at 19psi it would break them loos in 3rd when the boost came on..
The car really needed an auto to be a good track car...
The car was FUN...and to everyone who rode in it is was SCARY fast...I actually made someone cry,seriously bawling like a baby, during a 2nd gear pull in that car...lol..priceless

sounds crazy. ok ok ok but what you were to race on an unprepped track that had the same pavement composition as a street? would it be best to do a second gear start? just curious.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by thebrander

... unless you're a roadracer like myself. The low-end torque is a great blessing to have so that you're not having to carry the RPM's through the turns. Roadracing is also the argument for staying NA. Heaksoak kills power halfway through your session.

(not that anyway here probably cares, just pointing out that I'm truly unbiased about how easy it is to FI the 5.0's and LS3's because I have absolutely no desire to do so)

i guess u might be right in that aspect

[HIGHOCTANE]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

sounds crazy. ok ok ok but what you were to race on an unprepped track that had the same pavement composition as a street? would it be best to do a second gear start? just curious.

Nah, 1st would be better...with the semi-big(for twins) turbos they didn't build max boost until 4500 or so, but the boost came on violently...so a short shift 1st gear launch would be the best bet...shifting as soon as it started building boost,before the tires broke loose. I walked on a few bikes with that car...man what fun it was. It was a better roll racer than it was from a stop. Again it needed an Auto to make it a good drag car.
I can only imagine a similarily built LS3 Camaro...now that would be a BAD ASS car.... Give me time!
BTW....
Again,best bet with that much power and especially with turbo(s) is a well set up Auto...that way you can build boost before the launch and not have to re-build boost after shifts...

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by CLEAN

Well the real power of an engine is the torque. HP is basically a mathematical function of where in the powerband the power is made. The LS3 makes more torque than the 5.0, but even though the 5.0 is down 30-40 lb/ft, because it makes it's peak higher up in the band, the math works out to very similar HP's. So to answer your question, the LS3 makes more low end torque, but the 5.0 really comes on higher up. I'm like you though, I'll take low end torque over high end power, simply because I'm always is stop and go traffic.

HP = torque over time.

I use to be like that. I loved when I had my 90 5.0. It made low end torque but not power up high. Then I bought a liter bike. Basically a low/no torque motor that made power high up the rpm, and geared like crazy. For a pure performance setup it is hard to beat a high hp/high revving/geared vehicle.

For day to day, stop and go traffic, the low end torque is very nice.

[HIGHOCTANE]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

HP = torque over time.

I use to be like that. I loved when I had my 90 5.0. It made low end torque but not power up high. Then I bought a liter bike. Basically a low/no torque motor that made power high up the rpm, and geared like crazy. For a pure performance setup it is hard to beat a high hp/high revving/geared vehicle.

For day to day, stop and go traffic, the low end torque is very nice.

TWIN SCREW= best of both worlds...

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

probably the die hards ya

And most of us ARE die hards, just look at 90% of the arguments on here and you can see that...

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

The Automatic that Ford is using in the 2011 Mustang is newer design than the tranny in the Camaro. The 6 speed auto transmission can be setup to be paddle shifted and I honestly don't know why Ford didn't offer it for the Mustang.

That's not too surprising. Ford is notorious for this (Most shifters just have PRNDL), they won't let you manually select the gear on most of their cars with a 6 speed auto, and refuse to change it despite being blasted for it. It's a really obvious blemish on what are overall and otherwise fairly good vehicles.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

That's not too surprising. Ford is notorious for this (Most shifters just have PRNDL), they won't let you manually select the gear on most of their cars with a 6 speed auto, and refuse to change it despite being blasted for it. It's a really obvious blemish on what are overall and otherwise fairly good vehicles.

it isnt a very big deal to me, the car is faster when you let it shift itself. I can see maybe driving through hills being a bit annoying but i would just let it downshift itself by pressing the gas. No biggie, and automatic was made so that it shifts automatically. I have friends who just love to keep their automatic cars in a lower gear than they should be and like to shift the gears themselves, it gets very annoying sitting in the passenger seat with the driver thinking he's mario andretti in some clutchless manual racecar which it never is.

[hairtrigger]

5.0L Mustang 412 HP at 6800rpm with a torque peak around 4300 will mean you will be heavy into the throttle before you feel the power and thus drinking the gas.

The larger, easier to get into the torque, 6.2 will be a more fun DD. IMO

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by hairtrigger

5.0L Mustang 412 HP at 6800rpm with a torque peak around 4300 will mean you will be heavy into the throttle before you feel the power and thus drinking the gas.

The larger, easier to get into the torque, 6.2 will be a more fun DD. IMO

But the 6.2 is 1200cc's larger than the Mustangs engine. It produces more power down low but also consumes more fuel overall, especially down low.

In terms of fuel consumption, they're going to be about the same. Depending on how fast the 5.0 spins up it could actually produce usable power faster than a big, lazy 6.2.

[hairtrigger]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

But the 6.2 is 1200cc's larger than the Mustangs engine. It produces more power down low but also consumes more fuel overall, especially down low.

In terms of fuel consumption, they're going to be about the same. Depending on how fast the 5.0 spins up it could actually produce usable power faster than a big, lazy 6.2.

The LS3 is certainly noy lazy.

[Unfair]

Originally Posted by Super83Z

Lots of misinformation in this thread as usual. The Brembo's are not standard on the GT in the front. The $1700 Brembo and rim upgrade only upgrades the front brakes, the rears stay the same and its only available on the Premium GT.

Camaro's on this site have run 12.5's and 12.6's stock, so even at a weight disadvantage its still coming down to a drivers race. The 5.0 is no joke and its about time Ford put a worthwhile motor in the GT.

From what I have seen on the site list 1 person has run 12.5 and 1 person has run 12.6

That is definitely not the average run if it was more than one person would be running those times...