The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[Wacker]

Originally Posted by SSC Super Venom

Ok? Don't get offended I just posted the times I got. So what the Mustang is like a half a second faster big deal. Why do you guys care if another car is faster? It's just a car. And on the plus side its still extremely fast!

What mods are on your stang. I ran a 12.6@113 with a tune and exhaust, (no CAI) 12.4 with DR's.

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by KungFuHamster

i remember when they tested the 99 Cobra vs the 99 Camaro SS


they both ran 14.4

Yeah, Road and Track is well known for running slower than other magazines. But they are usually pretty consistant.

The main point is they ran faster in the Camaro SS. It's just one more test where the Camaro out ran the Mustang GT.

We all know the Camaro SS and Mustang GT are capable of running well down in the 12s (stock). But not everyone (including magazine test drivers) can run those times. You also have to take into account track conditions and elevation.

[MG]

Why do they show the Mustang in the lead in the drag race at the end of the video, if the Camaro runs quicker through the 1/4?

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by MG

Why do they show the Mustang in the lead in the drag race at the end of the video, if the Camaro runs quicker through the 1/4?

Because that video was just for show. The Mustang did come out on top of the overall comparison.

In that particular drag race video, the Camaro SS probably ran 14s in the 1/4 mile with all that wheel spin (actually got a little sideways on the launch - smoking the tires). You can also see the Mustang take off and leave the Camaro sitting on the line.

You're not going to run 13.0 in the 1/4 mile with all that wheel spin. It's just not going to happen.

[jbak]

I did a quick check to see if I could finding another posting before I started this thread. Came up with nothing.

R & T used to be notoriously inconsistent in their testing, but a few years back they improved their procedures to the point where I think they are now very consistent.

I like the fact that they waited a bit to get a real production Mustang. This would decrease the chance of getting a pre-production "ringer".

Of some interest (well... to me anyway...) 100 to 120 times:
Mustang: 5.1
Camaro: 4.8
G8 GXP: 4.6

G-loading...Mustang .91, Camaro .88, GXP .88

In slalom both Mustang and Camaro beat GXP

[Great White]

From everything I've seen, heard and read, the avg times for both the Mustang and Camaro are 12.8-13.2. That seems to be the range for almost ALL of the times from BOTH cars. Overall, I say it's still a driver's race in any event. I don't want to hear no BS wait till it's cooler weather or wait till it's broken in or wait till the owners have more seat time or rear end gear ratio. The fact of the matter is both cars are out and racing and posting the times. This is real life. Nothing will be perfectly equal every single time. I don't believe any car has an advantage except in a case by case situation. Driver skill, elevation, humidity, temps, gas level, driver weight, etc is all uncontrollable variables in any aspect of getting a track time. There are constant comparisons between 5.0 and LS3 but didn't a LS1 outrun the new 5.0? Where are the comparisons for that or even the LS1 vs LS3? IMO, they are all equal due to the avg time being in the same avg time range. With the controlled variables, uncontrolled variables, with numerous attempts and all equalling out about equal, it comes down to how efficient can the driver be against the other.

[lil_chef]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

I'm not sure if this is a repost (based strickly on the new Road and Track magazine that just hit the news stands).
The results have been online for a few weeks.
I just saw the new Road and Track at the airport (mag hasn't made it to my house in the mail yet) and it had the V8 Camaro vs V8 Mustang GT and the V6 Camaro vs V6 Mustang.

And the Camaro did run faster (1/4 mile) than the Mustang GT in their comparison.

is this the same test where they got the non-performance mustang? they have the 3.31 gears and all season tires? if so that was out on the internet about a month ago....and posted/debated heavily here.

[KungFuHamster]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

Yeah, Road and Track is well known for running slower than other magazines. But they are usually pretty consistant.

The main point is they ran faster in the Camaro SS. It's just one more test where the Camaro out ran the Mustang GT.

We all know the Camaro SS and Mustang GT are capable of running well down in the 12s (stock). But not everyone (including magazine test drivers) can run those times. You also have to take into account track conditions and elevation.

precisely.

but running 14.4s in a 99 Cobra wasnt too uncommon at that time (before the "fix")...but a 99 LS1 wouldve been mid 13s at the VERY LEAST. seeing that made me realize that magazine times are all just a bunch of bull.

[KungFuHamster]

Originally Posted by Great White

With the controlled variables, uncontrolled variables, with numerous attempts and all equalling out about equal, it comes down to how efficient can the driver be against the other.

this is truth

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by SSC Super Venom

Ok? Don't get offended I just posted the times I got. So what the Mustang is like a half a second faster big deal. Why do you guys care if another car is faster? It's just a car. And on the plus side its still extremely fast!

A half second (ill be waiting for a bone stock 11.9 run if so)? Dont hold your breath, Evan SMith ran a 12.3 with drag radials. The bone stock ls3 vettes best time is in the high 11's as well. It is 400 lbs lighter than a mustang. Its drivetrain is more efficient than a camaro. Vettes dyno about 10hp higher than a camaro on average. A half second is just a little too generous in my opinion.

The ls3 corvette is about a half second faster than the camaro. The 10 camaro was a half second faster than the 10 mustang....some looked at this as being close. But in reality if you lose to someone by a half second in a 1/4 mile drag you are going to be like 10 cars behind.

I will give the mustang about a ~.2 advantage on average all things being equal. I have said from the beginning a think the hero runs in cool weather for the stang will get down to around 12.3.
The car is awesome...I have nothing against it. But both being well driven it is going to be a close race every time. It looks like so far that the well driven (non hero runs) are 12.6-12.8 for the stang and 12.8-13.0 for the camaro.
I must admit mid to high 12 sec runs seem more frequent for the stang so far, considering it has been on the streets for such a short time.

Props to Ford. Congrats to all you mustang guys who finally got some respectable N/A power in GT form. I am honestly excited for you guys. But I wont be joining your camp anytime soon. I am a chevy guy through and through...just like many of you never switched sides when the camaro had the edge. It is all in good fun IMO.

Maybe if I have enough money some day I will own both. Which I would honestly like to do. Until then my heart is with the bowtie.

[ULTRAZLS1]

CAI with a tune. I am talking tuned with CAI vs tuned without CAI. I seen 1 stang dyno 415rwhp with the stock CAI. Your telling me the car is going to dyno 450rwhp with a cai and tune. No way.

Those are great runs. Funny the mph is about the same/slightly better as a car with full exhaust. Maybe those factory mid length headers do the job.

Its all in the 60 ft. The camaro has a hard time cutting a 1.6. The stang is well suited for the track especially once the cars start getting some mods/slicks etc. The camaro could cut a better 60 if we could fit some 15 inch drag radials...but still not quite as good as the stang with an SRA.

The camaro is also in dire need of a 4.10 gear. For one to get the weight moving and two because once you shift into 4th at 110 you are now in a gear that pulls all the way to 155mph...that is going to kill trap speed/ET etc.

Definitely nice times for the stang . That bitch is the real deal.

BTW...why are you a camaro guy with such love/so willing to report mustang numbers?

We have a lot of that on this website. FUN FUN

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by lil_chef

is this the same test where they got the non-performance mustang? they have the 3.31 gears and all season tires? if so that was out on the internet about a month ago....and posted/debated heavily here.

I got you. But for a lot of us its something new. The magazine just hit the news stands. I was pretty suprised to see it today at the airport.

The new Road and Track has the Camaro and the Mustang on the front cover.

[Wacker]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

CAI with a tune. I am talking tuned with CAI vs tuned without CAI. I seen 1 stang dyno 415rwhp with the stock CAI. Your telling me the car is going to dyno 450rwhp with a cai and tune. No way.

Those are great runs. Funny the mph is about the same/slightly better as a car with full exhaust. Maybe those factory mid length headers do the job.

Its all in the 60 ft. The camaro has a hard time cutting a 1.6. The stang is well suited for the track especially once the cars start getting some mods/slicks etc. The camaro could cut a better 60 if we could fit some 15 inch drag radials...but still not quite as good as the stang with an SRA.

The camaro is also in dire need of a 4.10 gear. For one to get the weight moving and two because once you shift into 4th at 110 you are now in a gear that pulls all the way to 155mph...that is going to kill trap speed/ET etc.

Definitely nice times for the stang . That bitch is the real deal.

BTW...why are you a camaro guy with such love/so willing to report mustang numbers?

We have a lot of that on this website. FUN FUN

I see 115 at 6400 with 4.10's. Basically gained an extra gear.

[jbak]

Originally Posted by lil_chef

is this the same test where they got the non-performance mustang? they have the 3.31 gears and all season tires? if so that was out on the internet about a month ago....and posted/debated heavily here.

The mustang had 3.73 rear gears and Pirelli P Zeros. The issue of R & T is brand new.