The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[SonnyakaPig]

Originally Posted by wbt

From where? That is way high....

http://www.livernoismotorsports.com/...t.phtml?p=2050 This is pretty close. Still not 500 rwhp, but definitely high hp/tq. And is upward of $7k.

[SonnyakaPig]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

it is the burden all Cobra owners must bear LoL

Haha. Cobras are sweet rides.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by assasinator

gearing is why a torqueless wonder 96-98 cobra can run 11's with a stock short block. bolt-on 96-98 cobra = 315rwhp/270rwtq shifting at 7000rpm.


torque is not technically how any work(racing) is performed. work performed over time is called horsepower. the low end torque your ls-3 makes calculates to hp. (work performed over time)


he who does the most work in the shortest amount of time wins the acceleration battle with all other things being equal. add gearing to increase the amount of tire patch pulling, and you get the winner. a 5.0 properly geared will do exactly the percentage (more or less) of actual acceleration that it's gearing and power curve compared to an ls-3. if any motor does the same amount of work over time as another, but it does it at higher rpms, and is geared to take advantage the higher rpm motor will do more actual pulling. but if the motor with less rpms and more torque does more work over time(hp) it wins.

torque in itself does nothing to anything. its just basic physics.

Essentially, torque is work on a rotating shaft. Fundamentally, work is force applied over a distance. This is exactly what happens during the power stroke of the internal combustion engine.

And torque has everything to do with it. The combustion of fuel in the cylinder exerts a pressure on the cylinder. Based upon the area of this cylinder (and the average pressure) a force is generated. This force is applied at a distance to the crankshaft. Force at a distance is torque. Torque*speed/constant=power. Essentially, torque is the fundamental 'thing' that an engine generates. Power is merely a function of torque.

Originally Posted by DeathChill

So is this online yet or what? I am interested in the article.

Not yet. Expect it in a couple weeks, that seems to be the way they've been doing things lately, probably to boost the actual magazine sales vs free viewing online.

[chappy48]

Here's another view of that same drag race. Auto Camaro SS vs Auto Mustang GT 5.0. Looks like the Mustang has us on this one boys.

[chappy48]

Posted this somewhere else, but it looks like the '11 Auto GT 5.0 walks on the Auto Camaro SS. And this is only an 1/8th mile drag. Yikes!!

[Big Brunsy]

Originally Posted by assasinator

gearing is why a torqueless wonder 96-98 cobra can run 11's with a stock short block. bolt-on 96-98 cobra = 315rwhp/270rwtq shifting at 7000rpm.


torque is not technically how any work(racing) is performed. work performed over time is called horsepower. the low end torque your ls-3 makes calculates to hp. (work performed over time)


he who does the most work in the shortest amount of time wins the acceleration battle with all other things being equal. add gearing to increase the amount of tire patch pulling, and you get the winner. a 5.0 properly geared will do exactly the percentage (more or less) of actual acceleration that it's gearing and power curve compared to an ls-3. if any motor does the same amount of work over time as another, but it does it at higher rpms, and is geared to take advantage the higher rpm motor will do more actual pulling. but if the motor with less rpms and more torque does more work over time(hp) it wins.

torque in itself does nothing to anything. its just basic physics.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Essentially, torque is work on a rotating shaft. Fundamentally, work is force applied over a distance. This is exactly what happens during the power stroke of the internal combustion engine.

And torque has everything to do with it. The combustion of fuel in the cylinder exerts a pressure on the cylinder. Based upon the area of this cylinder (and the average pressure) a force is generated. This force is applied at a distance to the crankshaft. Force at a distance is torque. Torque*speed/constant=power. Essentially, torque is the fundamental 'thing' that an engine generates. Power is merely a function of torque.

really. My auto instructor back in highschool gave us a little different deffinition of torque... he said, and I quote (to the best of my memory) "ya know when u wake up with ur morning wood, u just crank that sucker back and let her slap against ur stomach. NOW THATS TORQUE!"

[SwiftCat]

Originally Posted by HIGHOCTANE

Deadly in the wrong hands...my 2003 TT Cobra made 89x RWHP at 21psi on a Mustang Dyno...I've been driving modded high power cars for years...but honestly that is just too much power for the street..in 3rd gear it would violently light up 315 Hoosier drag radials at over 80 MPH when the boost came on..
Nice thing about turbos and electronic boost controllers...you can set the boost where you want it at the touch of a button..anything over about 680-700 RWHP is a waste on the street IMO so I ran about 11-15psi (~600-700 RWHP) most of the time on the street...890 was fun for the occasional scaring the crap out of someone but 600-700 was actually more fun to drive.

Oh and running 11.9s and faster on street tires is no small feat and power is only one part of the equation...

As for Kenne Bell and 1000 HP...I haven't looked at the site in a while..but usually those numbers they put up are based on how much power the blower can support based on how much air it can flow...Mustang or Camaro if you want that kind of power reliably it is going to take alot more than just strapping on a blower and turning up the boost...alot more.
I've owned Kenn Belles and Whipples..in the past the main deciding factor between one or the other(as long as the size was the same) was really which look you preferred.

You know much more about modded cars than I...I've never ran S/C myself, although I'd like to sometime in the near future. As to the Kenne Bell I was referring to though, they say it's rated up to 1400 HP, but can reach as high as 1000 HP with nothing more than stock. Why is the range between 774-1000? That seems like a pretty large range between the two stats?
Thanks...Swifty

[a_Username]

I called it! The base GT is going to have traction issues due to those tiny 235s

[Hesh]

Originally Posted by SonnyakaPig

http://www.livernoismotorsports.com/...t.phtml?p=2050 This is pretty close. Still not 500 rwhp, but definitely high hp/tq. And is upward of $7k.

That package you are giving includes buying a pair of heads, not porting the stock ones. So yes will be alot more expensive than just porting.

[|BLACKSS|]

150 lbs is better than i thought i have intake and exhaust and i also heard that the new GT has a really good intake on it from the factory already and there is not much to gain there plus i saw that the peak hp 412 is at 6500 rpm... is ford spinning this motor high so they can advertise over 400 hp....its more that just peak hp. and before you say anything im not bashing the new gt i think it is cool it has 400 hp ITS ABOUT TIME IT TOOK FOREVER

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by a_Username

I called it! The base GT is going to have traction issues due to those tiny 235s

Based on the article, the GT was running the 255/40/19s and it ran the same 0-60mph as the Camaro SS (4.6 sec). The advantge was beyond the 60mph mark.

Camaro SS, 0-100 mph - 10.5 sec
Mustang GT, 0-100 mph - 11.0 sec

Camaro SS ,0-130 mph - 18.0 sec
Mustang GT, 0-130 mph - 19.8 sec

Based on their testing the SS's advantage increases as the speeds increase.

But this is just one test. I'm sure there will be plenty of other magazine with different results.

[BlackieRay]

None of this is surprising. I'm completely unimpressed with the V-tec Mustang. Despite the hype, the GT is still not a serious competitor for the SS. Ford is going to have to do more than copy Honda technology and put a new coat of paint on the old mod motor. At least it beats that old slug they were pawning off on everyone last year.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

It's good to see a battle. There was a lot of initial hype about that 5.0L Mustang. It is good to see a demonstration of the Camaro beating it. It's a close race, and arguing over such a small difference is futile. After all, none of us are hitting the track stock.

Stock vs stock is very important though in the minds of the magazine readers. Obviously it's a drivers race, however bias cannot mask numbers as in this case the Camaro won by a hair. I remember the Mustang beat the Camaro in all categories other than actual speed and times which gave it an edge to the writers. They all said the Mustang has a better interior, better feel to it, etc..So it was rated higher and won last years shootout. This year it should be no different in the comfort category but I am surprised at the very similar times in the 0-60 category. It seems the stock GT should be hitting 4.5 0-60 based on the lesser weight.

Overall I am glad to see Ford still churning out cars American's want to buy. I am hoping Government run GM doesn't mess up the sixth gen Camaro.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

Car and Driver used a 2SS/RS ($36,465.00) for the lastest testing.

$3485.00 more than the GT's ($32,980.00)

I wish these comparisons were done with the entry level trim rather than some options here, other options there. There are hundreds of ways to optimize these cars from the factory as well as aftermarket. To me the most important measure is baseline performance, followed by upgrade potential.

Why not start with the base GT (MSRP $29,645) vs the base SS (MSRP $30,945)? These are the prices the average Joe could slip behind the wheel for.

Kudos to Ford for offering the starting price $1,300 clams less than the 2010 SS and that gap is likely to grow when Chevrolet announces the 2011 pricing.