The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by KungFuHamster

that would be the only reasonable way to do it...because if the mustang just happens to win (we all know it wouldnt, because mustangs are much, much, much, much slower than any Camaro built. ever) then the whole "well if the Camaro had a good driver it wouldve won..." yadda yadda yadda garbage is out the window.

Fer sure. The Mustang guys would never get offended by claims that their car is slower.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by 2010 US Army 2SS/RS

I am hearing alot of stories about the new 2011 5.0 stang being able to "crush" the SS...i hear that the 5.0 doesnt have the low end torque...mixed stories....someone clarify...

Auto vs auto, the Mustang has the edge. Manual vs manual, Camaro.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by SS420

Ok, this is what we found out. When the 5.0 is mashed to the max...it's receiving 86% throttle. Has something to do with the drive-by-wire. When that's manipulated....to where you are getting the full 100% from the car. The Mustang 5.0 puts down 400RWHP!!! At the stock 86%..your getting about 365RWHP.
Either way....I feel cheated.

I had my MT SS dynoed on a Mustand Dyno...and I got 358.7RWHP.

Not sure I believe this. At what RPM ranges is the stock 5.0 redlined at? I'll guess somewhere around 6500 to 6800 RPM....so getting another 14% throttle would mean this car could max out at over a 7 grand RPM??? What that even be useful power?

I'd like to see a dyno... usually at a certain RPM torque starts to drop way off so I'm not sure how much benefit you'd get out of this even if it were true.

I'm guessing what could be said is that while "mashing" it only gets you 86%, all these cars are drive by wire, and completely controlled via the ECU, so you know non of these cars (Camaro included) are getting the max possible throttle, b/c they are all redlined and cut off for warranty/durability purposes.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by 2010 US Army 2SS/RS

I am hearing alot of stories about the new 2011 5.0 stang being able to "crush" the SS...i hear that the 5.0 doesnt have the low end torque...mixed stories....someone clarify...

And other people claim the Camaro can "Crush" the new Mustang.

Tit-for-tat, the cars both perform about the same it's probably the closest drivers race you'll ever get between two different cars.

[wbt]

Originally Posted by v6sonoma

If the stang has the optional 3.73's then it's a close race but the longer the distance the better the camaro will do. Of course if you throw 3.73's or 4.10's in the Camaro the Camaro's torque will give it the edge.

Not really. The 3.31 geared Mustang is still geared more aggressively than a 3.73 Camaro.

Move to the 3.73 gear in the Mustang and you are needing 4.30 gear in the Camaro to even the field.

It has been discussed in this sub-forum previously.

[SILVER BULLITT]

[SVT_SRT]

at our mustang club dyno day it only put down 346 at the wheels.....

[squatin0n18s]

Originally Posted by SS420

Ok, this is what we found out. When the 5.0 is mashed to the max...it's receiving 86% throttle. Has something to do with the drive-by-wire. When that's manipulated....to where you are getting the full 100% from the car. The Mustang 5.0 puts down 400RWHP!!! At the stock 86%..your getting about 365RWHP.
Either way....I feel cheated.

I had my MT SS dynoed on a Mustand Dyno...and I got 358.7RWHP.

[8cd03gro]

The auto mustang puts a decent amount more power (20rwhp) down and weighs 250 +/-lbs less than the l99. That's quite an advantage. The A6 5.0 has put up faster times than both the m6 5.0 and m6 camaro. An A6 5.0 should pull an l99 every time (of course, "every time" is never true) if they're both stock. m6 vs m6, average times are extremely similar and fastest times are almost identical.

[n2oSS]

so when we gonna get to the fun conversation ....... fully modded ss vs fully modded mustang. Stock for stock is so boring.

[8cd03gro]

What's fully modded?

[syr74]

Originally Posted by BlackonblackV6_2010

He's also completely oblivious to the fact he has no idea how hard the jobs are in a manufacturing based setting, now don't get me wrong I'm ex GM worker myself and the Union has strayed from it's old school principals. If it wasn't for Union based shops we would all be treated like Chinese immigrant workers and then where would we be.

That is pure fantasy. Examples?

The union was little more than a paid henchmen for big business for almost a century in NE Tennessee, SE Kentucky, and West Virginia as it relates to coal because, to do so, was in their best financial interest at the time. Working conditions were terrible, pay was not commensurate with the labor involved, and employees on strike were threatened, beaten, and killed as recently as the 1970's with the union doing absolutely nothing of meaning to prevent it. In fact, as stated earlier, it eventually became obvious that the companies and the unions were in bed together more often than not.

To the contrary, Henry Ford pioneered the notion of a modern, living wage with good benefits well before the unions sunk their proverbial claws into Detroit. You can keep the union and the corruption they bring, I'll continue to earn a very nice living because I do what I do very well.

[firesquirt]

Originally Posted by motorhead

You better go buy a foreign car if you want non union labor to build it. At least their're built here and not in Cananda. And before everyone from Cananda hops in their cars and comes down here to kick my ass for saying that, I don't have a problem with my camaro coming from cananda. I was merely making the point that the op's last comment makes no sense.

[firesquirt]

Originally Posted by SSACCO

Now I know why the stang is a touch faster than the SS. EVERYBODY knows stickers make cars go faster.

UAW Local 31 here btw, and proud of it.

United Steel Workers 21167 and damn proud of it!