The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

I'm not positive either way, and I agree the trap beams could be spaced improperly on that track, but don't forget that motorweek trapped 116 in a different car on a different day.

from what i get on the net, that 115 guy trapped 114-115 bone stock in both lanes and the camaro dude trapped 108-111 with boltons and an A6. According to the list on here 111 seems about average for an a6 with boltons.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

from what i get on the net, that 115 guy trapped 114-115 bone stock in both lanes and the camaro dude trapped 108-111 with boltons and an A6. According to the list on here 111 seems about average for an a6 with boltons.

I thought he trapped 110-111? He also said stock at Sacremento he was 3-4 MPH faster than the people on the C5 fast list with the same ET's and had a higher trap than the best L99 traps. So he has provided reason for there to be doubt about the GT trap.

Vendicated said he was going to a different track during the week but then never posted about it again.

[VetteMaro]

Originally Posted by AmericanMuscle4.6GT

yea thats insane





that mustang was running full bias ply slicks......the camaro in this vid is running what appears to be basic m/t et street radials..........so yea..........





this musclecar arms race has really escalated out of control to the point where nobody thought it was going to get this extreme. Streetable cars running 10's for less than 3-4k in mods? are you freaking kidding me?

Damn orangechevy's SS sounds AMAZING... Definately one of the most badass 5th gens out there!!!

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

I thought he trapped 110-111? He also said stock at Sacremento he was 3-4 MPH faster than the people on the C5 fast list with the same ET's and had a higher trap than the best L99 traps. So he has provided reason for there to be doubt about the GT trap.

Vendicated said he was going to a different track during the week but then never posted about it again.

i need to look at the timeslip again, maybe the one i saw was the mustang dude vs someone else but i know i saw 108.xx on it, but im pretty sure it was against the camaro. i need to double check on that front. And running a different mph vs ET is just another variable, Sacramento Raceway has non existent track prep. Either way the dude trapped 4 (+)mph faster than a bolt on A6 car and those have been proven to trap 111mph pretty commonly, even if the timeslip didnt add up somehow.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by firelife25

i think this shop is full of shit....when i called them and asked what was done..they told me headers and other bolt-ons weight reductions spray and suspention work...then i call back and they claim different....not to mention they run a 1.5 60ft with a 200shot off the line...then they claim a 1.4 60ft with no spray...i call total bs

What are you talking about? They never even ran a 200 shot on the car and they ran 1.4 sixties on the nitrous also. I doubt you even called them, but if you did, did you specify what run you were asking about? Because the modifications have changed constantly. If you're going to call BS, at least have your facts straight... and spelling damn.

[VetteMaro]

Originally Posted by AmericanMuscle4.6GT

does anyone really think the Camaro will never be able to keep up with the Mustang, mod for mod (with relative similarity)?

just because you can't just slap on an intake and make it faster than any mustang will ever be anymore, doesn't mean its not gonna be screaming fast......i feel like LSx Fbody guys are just used to the Mustang being so far below the Camaro in performance, that it makes it seem like the Mustang is just too much competition, overestimating it in a sense. Camaro guys just don't seem to be used to the idea of having to actually try to beat a mustang

This man speaks the truth, and im a chevy guy! People around here need a thicker skin

[VetteMaro]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

I won't say it's total bull, but I want to see other shops results. Apparently the GT500 guys have a bone to pick with them so I want to see if the results are reproducible by other shops before I think about working with them.

This is true, i saw some talk about this when the 07 GT500 came out.

[firelife25]

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

What are you talking about? They never even ran a 200 shot on the car and they ran 1.4 sixties on the nitrous also. I doubt you even called them, but if you did, did you specify what run you were asking about? Because the modifications have changed constantly. If you're going to call BS, at least have your facts straight... and spelling damn.

I did call them and asked many questions about the car...and about what they had on the car in each video...and what i was told was A 200 SHOT...i dont car what the video claims it has done to it..anyone can post a video and say it has this and that...i do have my facts staight bub!! and dont really give a shit if i spelled something wrong!!!and no im not trying to hate on the mustang... i like mustangs, just dont trust a word these guys are saying

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by firelife25

I did call them and asked many questions about the car...and about what they had on the car in each video...and what i was told was A 200 SHOT...i dont car what the video claims it has done to it..anyone can post a video and say it has this and that...i do have my facts staight bub!! and dont really give a shit if i spelled something wrong!!!and no im not trying to hate on the mustang... i like mustangs, just dont trust a word these guys are saying

Well you obviously don't have your facts straight because the ran 1.4x for the 60' on the nitrous runs. Who did you talk to? Everything else says it was a 125 shot. They have said it multiple times, as have other sources. Maybe they put a 200 shot on it, but they haven't run down the track with it. When Evolution posts on their facebook, on the forums and on their own youtube account that the car was on a 125 shot, but some random guy on the internet that claims that on nitrous the car ran 1.5 60's (wrong) and says he called them and they said it had a 200 shot, I have reason to think you are bullshitting. Again, who did you talk to?

[ULTRAZLS1]

Ill believe the 115 trap when I see a few more people do it.

It is possible I suppose...it is just weird when the manual transmission cars are all in the 109-112 range. Evan Smith only trapped 112 in a manual transmission GT.

It is also weird he was going 88mph in the 1/8th which would add up to about a 111 trap. (seen this on a mustang site where many were doubting this trap speed)

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

the less torque is negated by less weight and better torque mutiplication (gearing, i hope you know what that does).

4 or 5 mph faster? closer to 3-4mph faster and according to the official fastest list on this very site, the span of mph's for the camaros are up to 6mph's do we throw out the ones that are more than 4 mph's faster than the slowest ones then????? some of you guys seem to be making up the rules as you go along?

so you dont count the new 5.0's that run 109-110 mph? you want to argue over 1mph difference? fine. the 115 trap speed id 3.5-4.5 mph faster than any other 5.0 out there. same 1\8th, same 60', same 1\4, yet a significantly faster trap speed. something doesn't make sense, and you're a part of it.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

from what i get on the net, that 115 guy trapped 114-115 bone stock in both lanes and the camaro dude trapped 108-111 with boltons and an A6. According to the list on here 111 seems about average for an a6 with boltons.

i've explained the trap speed on the l99 and you ignored it like a fanboi. there are many poor running l99's out there. very poor. it is quite possible that an l99 with headers ran around 105 mph. some run good, some really bad.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

There have only been like 3 and they all had stalled autos, tons of weight reduction and a LOT of bolt ons. Oh and they all happened at least five or six years after production of the ls1 fbodies started. Just to keep things clear.

and this mustang is basically the same as the one that has been out for years. so parts are readily available for it. and it's been done by a performance shop with the mustang. just to keep things clear.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by big hammer

so you dont count the new 5.0's that run 109-110 mph? you want to argue over 1mph difference? fine. the 115 trap speed id 3.5-4.5 mph faster than any other 5.0 out there. same 1\8th, same 60', same 1\4, yet a significantly faster trap speed. something doesn't make sense, and you're a part of it.

Originally Posted by big hammer

i've explained the trap speed on the l99 and you ignored it like a fanboi. there are many poor running l99's out there. very poor. it is quite possible that an l99 with headers ran around 105 mph. some run good, some really bad.

i would reply to these but will chose to ignore them since youd most likely keep resorting to childish name calling. please excuse us,adults are trying to have a valid discussion here.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Ill believe the 115 trap when I see a few more people do it.

It is possible I suppose...it is just weird when the manual transmission cars are all in the 109-112 range. Evan Smith only trapped 112 in a manual transmission GT.

It is also weird he was going 88mph in the 1/8th which would add up to about a 111 trap. (seen this on a mustang site where many were doubting this trap speed)

this L99 Car with boltons trapped 87 in the eighth and 112.66 in the 1/4.



if you add another MPH in the 1/8 and your looking at 113.66 or maybe even higher. Thats close to 114mph right there. Who knows what the rest of the run was like, maybe there was something in the air (kinda like the 112mph runs from the camaro) 115mph might be a lil high but this other dude is making it sound like its outlandish.

or better yet look at this guy with boltons. Hes trapping almost 113 with only 86.xxmph in the 1/8 mile. i dont see people questioning those 1/8mi traps vs 1/4 mile traps here. It seems people dont want to accept it, not because it might not make sense, but because its a mustang!




oh yeah one more. 2010 Camaro with boltons. Traps 89 in the 1/8 and over 115 in the 1/4. sure its 1 more mph in the 1/8 but its still close. Anyways not sure why people think its that unbelievable when theres similar numbers on this very site (and thats only getting to the second page of the "fatstest list!") that are accepted without scrutiny.