The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[Sax1031]

psi

[ULTRAZLS1]

I added in the "psi" after the numbers just for you

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I added in the "psi" after the numbers just for you

I think you had me confused. I am talking about compressed air being shoved into the engine.

[justincase_2008]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

So what is it when you dislike a car so much that you register on its site and pretend to have one and then post all about how you like its direct competitor better?

Oh thats right, I think its called trolling. I mean havent you noticed youve done nothing but praise Ford and shit talk GM since you registered? It wasnt hard to figure out. Even the most clueless 4th gen SS owners know slp made the SS. You mean to tell me you know more about ford (a ton more) but you dont know about your own car? Sorry bro, Im not buying it. Ill paypal you $20 if you can get two pics, one pic of yourself infront of your car with a sign that says "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot is a D-bag or licks nuts" whatever tickles your fancy and one of the rpo sticker (legible) with the same sign next to it.

Oh and to again keep it on track. My predictions for 2011 SS are same motor same weight, different gear options for the SS to edge out the mustang 1/4 mile. Why work harder than you have to right?

Dude i owned a 1993 z28 Camaro and had no idea slp did the ss. and i know a ton more about mustangs cause of my dad and his fordisum. some people dont know everything about everything, thats why im on here to learn about these great cars too. Ok troll he may be but not every one in a car freak. That eing said im here to learn shit i didnt know my 2010 SS had sport mode till i saw it here. And no i didnt read the manual that is cheating.

[ULTRAZLS1]

From this information the 5.0 will have to be more efficient than a formula one engine to even get within 50ft lbs of the ls3 at only 200psi.

I thought this was an interesting, informative and very pleasant read.

[Sax1031]

Give me rpms + hp + gearing and you can keep your torque in a performance application.

My 2002 GSX-R1000 taught me that.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Give me rpms + hp + gearing and you can keep your torque in a performance application.

My 2002 GSX-R1000 taught me that.

LOL...read the article. It applies to horsepower as well. I just didnt calculate for that...it would be behind in the same fashion. Power output is power output.

Either way RPM (500 difference between the two) + hp (more with maxed ls3) +gearing (pick your gear and put them in)

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Give me rpms + hp + gearing and you can keep your torque in a performance application.

My 2002 GSX-R1000 taught me that.

Without torque, there is no hp. Torque is the force generated at some distance from the center of rotation, hp is how fast that torque is applied. You can't have hp without torque as you said, they are inter-related.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

Without torque, there is no hp. Torque is the force generated at some distance from the center of rotation, hp is how fast that torque is applied. You can't have hp without torque as you said, they are inter-related.

Yes hp is derived from torque.

What I am saying is let me make my hp high in the rpm range so that I can gear the thing for performance.

You can keep the low range torque numbers.

And yes a 6.2 has more potential than a 5.0.

[Unfair]

That kid needs help. I feel sorry for him. poor guy thinks the internet is real life :(

[justincase_2008]

why do u keep coming back to get messed with move on dude. Its the unwritten rule of the internet. It like hitler up in here.... Godwin's Law smashed up in this fourm.

[Kakashi]

Originally Posted by Mr CLuTcH

I never claimed to be a drag racer, which is why I asked YOU OR SOMEONE KNOWLEGABLE to explain, dufus. Thx for pointing out the obvious. You wanna explain my initial question?

It's probably multi-factorial. Lot of variables come into play. The following are just possible explanations on why it has a lower ET but the same MPH. I'm not trying to pass them as facts nor am I defending the Camaro:

-Lower weight means easier to get moving.
-Might be easier to launch the car with a a live axle vs an IRS
-Gearing multiplication may be better than the camaro, even if they weighted the same and had the same HP/TQ
-The car can go faster than 12.7 and someone was granny shifting
-Exhibit A: Supra: 13.X @ 120mph, Exhibit B: Camaro 12.95 @ 107mph... I'm sure some of the old timers will know this joke.
-Did not hook well with the Camaro, hence a poor 60ft time and higher ET
-Camaro accelerates faster during the last 1/8 of the mile thus making up the MPH, but not the lost ET
-Aborted the run prematurely
-etc, etc, etc. Many things can go wrong, thats why people bring it to the track to test: May the fastest car win!

[Whiskey Tango Foxtrot]

Originally Posted by justincase_2008

why do u keep coming back to get messed with move on dude. Its the unwritten rule of the internet. It like hitler up in here.... Godwin's Law smashed up in this fourm.

LOL. Hes like Steven Segal.


Hes Out For Justice.

[justincase_2008]

and a tv show...