The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by REEFBLUE93

No...it's because they are slow

Slow?



Just so you know..the DA was 2,559 feet. Running the calculator that turns to..

13.188 @ 106.629 MPH

That was on stock tires, stock exhaust, stock tune, stock suspension and 89 octane gas. The only "performance" mod I had was a K&N Series 63 CAI.

So...extremely lightly modded, and at sea level it would have run 13.1 seconds. With a DA of over 2500 feet it ran 13.6

How is that slow?

[REEFBLUE93]

Originally Posted by mjf6866

how did this turn into "the challenger is slow" thread? lots of hate i must say! i will add a few things since now my car is all of a sudden a part of this thread!

squatinon18s: 13.5's for the R/T stock is in the average range for what we are seeing. some guys are even lower. the lowest times are coming from the autos, as launching a 4000lb car on crappy all season touring tires is VERY tricky with the manual. i just cant figure it out on mine. it takes a lot of finess without going up in smoke. poor selection by dodge on the shoes that come on them. i know, i know, sounds like an excuse i'm sure, but with a good set of rubber, cat-back and drop in filters, R/Ts have been in the high 12's. bone stock, nobody is touching 12's obviously. mostly 13.1-13.6 for people that know how to drive and of course it all depends on location and weather conditions.

about the SRT being the top dog...its a numbers game. there are just too many SRT owners that will not track their car either because they just dont care to or they think it will be some sought after collectors item 30 years from now. the total production for challengers is VERY low compared to the competition. there are more R/T guys tracking their cars which there is more data to pull from and the new 5.7 vvt engine is under rated a bit (did i say that!? last time i brought that up i was accused of living in a fantasy world! so be it.) which is why times are so close to the 6.1 and a 6.4 is on the way.

and i'm a challenger guy that doesnt "bash." i really like all 3 brands and would love to own one of each. i can accept other brands along side of mine, unlike some guys on this board.

just want to help set the facts straight, as it seems ViperTomcat's posts are ignored.

Not trying to turn this into a "Challenger Bashing Thread" but if it quacks like a duck.... It is what it is, a 4K lb car, probably closer to 4100, that makes pretty good power and torque but is just really big and heavy. I have street tires on my car and am producing close to 480 hp at the crank so I know all about tire spin issues. Challengers are great looking cars and real eye catchers on the street but with out sinking a ton of money into one to go faster, it's just not going to happen.

[REEFBLUE93]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Slow?



Just so you know..the DA was 2,559 feet. Running the calculator that turns to..

13.188 @ 106.629 MPH

That was on stock tires, stock exhaust, stock tune, stock suspension and 89 octane gas. The only "performance" mod I had was a K&N Series 63 CAI.

So...extremely lightly modded, and at sea level it would have run 13.1 seconds. With a DA of over 2500 feet it ran 13.6

How is that slow?

It's a matter of opinion man but you know what they say about opinions. I've seen "lightly modded" Mustangs just rape those cars. So in my opinion, based on what I've seen, they are slow.

[ViperTomcat]

Then I guess the vast majority of Camaro's are slow too..and 2005-2010 Mustang GT's.

[motorhead]

I didn't read a single post in this thread because I'm sure it's full of mustang Vs camaro laughs ,but I have to say I don't know why the topic of the thread really surprises anyone.
Motortrend is playing the game very well. One day the camaro, the next day the mustang.
This keeps everyone reading.

[REEFBLUE93]

And I've never bought into this whole DA scenario. You ran a particular time that's going to be consistent in regards to the climate you live in. That's border line bench racing IMO. I don't know of too many guys that will knock 5 tenths off their times by calculating woulda, coulda, shoulda.

[REEFBLUE93]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Then I guess the vast majority of Camaro's are slow too..and 2005-2010 Mustang GT's.

Maybe so, I guess I should amend my original statement and say that the Challenger is really slow.

[assasinator]

Originally Posted by REEFBLUE93

And I've never bought into this whole DA scenario. You ran a particular time that's going to be consistent in regards to the climate you live in. That's border line bench racing IMO. I don't know of too many guys that will knock 5 tenths off their times by calculating woulda, coulda, shoulda.

go to mile high with your setup so we can laugh at your times....see if DA corrections mean anything. ill race at Atco in negative DA. see how close a car with less in it can come to your blown setup.

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by REEFBLUE93

And I've never bought into this whole DA scenario. You ran a particular time that's going to be consistent in regards to the climate you live in. That's border line bench racing IMO. I don't know of too many guys that will knock 5 tenths off their times by calculating woulda, coulda, shoulda.

So..you dont buy into the idea that a car will run better at sea level than at 1,410 feet of elevation, in weather conditions that made it more like 2,550 feet?

Because that is all the DA calculations do, they use math formulas to adjust for changing, known conditions and convert the time accordingly. NASCAR and the NHRA use the same principle.

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Then I guess the vast majority of Camaro's are slow too..and 2005-2010 Mustang GT's.

My 2007 Mustang hasn't lost to a Challenger yet.

As an added bonus, I got to see one of my opponents throw a hissy-fit after his defeat.

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by assasinator

go to mile high with your setup so we can laugh at your times....see if DA corrections mean anything. ill race at Atco in negative DA. see how close a car with less in it can come to your blown setup.

Dude, he lives in Texas. I'm sure he is used to racing in 100+ degree weather and 90+% humidity.

[ViperTomcat]

Originally Posted by 1bad65

My 2007 Mustang hasn't lost to a Challenger yet.

As an added bonus, I got to see one of my opponents throw a hissy-fit after his defeat.

I wasnt saying the Challenger routinely beats Mustangs, I was saying that if he says a car that runs a 13.1-13.3 nearly stock is slow..then there are alot of "slow" Mustangs and GT's.

[REEFBLUE93]

Originally Posted by assasinator

go to mile high with your setup so we can laugh at your times....see if DA corrections mean anything. ill race at Atco in negative DA. see how close a car with less in it can come to your blown setup.

Well that's just stupid. Why in the world would I want to drive to Denver to race my car that was built here in TEXAS? Maybe if I lived in Denver, I would have a different set up?? Wow man, were you really being serious?

[MADBOWTIE]

Hey, lets let the mustang and challenger guys go at it........... somebody's got to be second best!! Sorry couldn't help it, carry on.