R&T: FRPP 400hp Mustang GT tested! - Page 4

porcupinekiller · 03-23-2009, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by truth411

But on a side note, It would be cool if we had say a $12,000 Z28 package!!! (wink, wink GM)

Z28 dead in the water. Too bad, it would have been cool to see it go up against the new GT500.
http://jalopnik.com/5176933/camaro-z...urther-delayed

Blownhotrodder · 03-23-2009, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddiehaskell

But traction doesn't affect MPH.

Really?

That is all.

eddiehaskell · 03-23-2009, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

LOL traps are also dependent on driver, just not as much as ET. But traps can be affected. I've seen LS1 powered cars trap 99-101 stock with a manual.

Some people are afraid to push the gas once they hook up.

Quote:

if the stock 4.6's trap 103's, adding 100 hp is not going to make it trap only 5 mph higher. That's just wishful thinking on the camaro owners part.

They actually picked up about 5.5mph and the difference is 85hp. Also keep in mind that the S/C probably adds 50lbs.

eddiehaskell · 03-23-2009, 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blownhotrodder

Really?

That is all.

It seems to be physics.

fdjizm · 03-23-2009, 06:54 AM

eddie didn't splain to me how one mustang ran 12.6 @ 108 and how another ran 12.3 @ 106

what happend there, im not too scientific but the 108mph car should be faster?

and ANY car has the potential of handling on the track, if you think not talk to these guys...

Shifty 6 · 03-23-2009, 10:05 AM

I haven't read through all the name calling, but keep in mind it was a different day with a different driver, with a different road surface. Lots of "differents", look at the differences between the edmunds article and motor trend. They got different numbers but their comparisons of the cars was fair because they were all compared at the same time, on the same surface. I agree with the mustang guy, that they are running the same numbers with more power, it doesn't make sense. But we will need to wait till they get tested at the same time.

Georgie · 03-23-2009, 11:04 AM

there's no point. stock internals are good to 470whp. for 5k youre better off w/ a twin screw from the aftermarket

porcupinekiller · 03-23-2009, 12:56 PM

For those that are interested here's a write up in MMFF Magazine where they threw most of the FRPP catalog at a 2006 Mustang GT. Keep in mind that there was no GT500 in 2006.
http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...car/index.html

http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...kes/index.html

Here it is with $6500 worth of parts before the intercooler and boost upgrade it ran 12.66 at 107 mph.
http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...all/index.html

1_2Many · 03-23-2009, 01:02 PM

Can the LS3 handle even a 5 psi boost? The Mustang has a 9.6:1 compression ratio whereas the Camaro has 10.7:1. It seems risky to boost on such high compression no?

I'm curious as to the streetability of the LS3 with the +50 hp hot cam. Surely this would be a cheaper option than a blower, but can this still be a daily driver?

*Mr. Wyndham* · 03-23-2009, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1_2Many

Can the LS3 handle even a 5 psi boost? The Mustang has a 9.6:1 compression ratio whereas the Camaro has 10.7:1. It seems risky to boost on such high compression no?

There are plenty of FI applications for the LS3 as it sits in the Corvette. Some even as high as 8psi. Most are 7psi. So long as it's tuned properly, and you're using premium+ fuel...you could probably go to 10psi without a problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1_2Many

I'm curious as to the streetability of the LS3 with the +50 hp hot cam. Surely this would be a cheaper option than a blower, but can this still be a daily driver?

I want to say I've read that you barely notice the cam over a stock engine.

SilverTurtle · 03-23-2009, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdjizm

crappy drivers u can do much more than that with 400hp.

the drivers in the review posted are comparable to edmunds as they had crap numbers for the camaro as well.

all this benchracing has to stop... lets wait until we get some good drivers running these cars on the street before we rush to conclusions that a 400hp Mustang is slow.

Crowley · 03-23-2009, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddiehaskell

But traction doesn't affect MPH. The Camaro traps 111mph whereas this car trapped 108 mph. The Camaro is faster.

Ahh .. but it does if you have to let off the gas and then get back on it to get traction ... that car should be faster than the camaro as it has less weight ..

Crowley

Crowley · 03-23-2009, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1_2Many

I'm curious as to the streetability of the LS3 with the +50 hp hot cam. Surely this would be a cheaper option than a blower, but can this still be a daily driver?

Im going to guess that it is very streetable .. as a matter of fact, on my 2001 SS (LS1) .. I had the G5 cam, LT headers and offroad Y pipe (stock catback), Underdrive pulleys and a tune and it put down 381 to the wheels .. It was very streetable (I put down 306 to the wheels stock) ..

Crowley

GrnMchin · 03-23-2009, 06:26 PM

So I not sure I like the restyled mustang all that much. I liked the last body style a lot better. Seems that last years model had more appeal to me. What are the thought of current Mustang owner on this Forum?

03-23-2009, 06:54 AM	#47
fdjizm Account Suspended Drives: 2008 Mustang GT/CS Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: New Jersey Posts: 1,429 View My Garage	eddie didn't splain to me how one mustang ran 12.6 @ 108 and how another ran 12.3 @ 106 what happend there, im not too scientific but the 108mph car should be faster? and ANY car has the potential of handling on the track, if you think not talk to these guys... Last edited by fdjizm; 03-23-2009 at 07:46 AM.

03-23-2009, 01:02 PM	#51
1_2Many Drives: 2008 Suzuki SX4 Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: SoCal Posts: 785 View My Garage	Can the LS3 handle even a 5 psi boost? The Mustang has a 9.6:1 compression ratio whereas the Camaro has 10.7:1. It seems risky to boost on such high compression no? I'm curious as to the streetability of the LS3 with the +50 hp hot cam. Surely this would be a cheaper option than a blower, but can this still be a daily driver? __________________ We are the early orderers...we are GM's voluntary guinea pigs and their free source of feedback. How will we be thanked?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
OFFICIAL 2010 Camaro Specifications (full tech specs PDF inside)	Tran	Guides, Manuals, Bulletins, Documentation Archive	394	06-11-2010 07:16 PM
2010 mustang GT track pack tested!! impresive	truth411	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	130	02-05-2009 12:28 PM
Mustang Premium Pricing Revealed	Croathlete	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	56	11-24-2008 02:22 AM
Edmunds: 2010 Ford Mustang First Look	Scotsman	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	32	11-23-2008 10:55 PM

03-23-2009, 10:05 AM	#48
Shifty 6 Drives: 2010 GTI Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Morton, IL Posts: 679	I haven't read through all the name calling, but keep in mind it was a different day with a different driver, with a different road surface. Lots of "differents", look at the differences between the edmunds article and motor trend. They got different numbers but their comparisons of the cars was fair because they were all compared at the same time, on the same surface. I agree with the mustang guy, that they are running the same numbers with more power, it doesn't make sense. But we will need to wait till they get tested at the same time.

03-23-2009, 11:04 AM	#49
Georgie Drives: Camaro... soon Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,217	there's no point. stock internals are good to 470whp. for 5k youre better off w/ a twin screw from the aftermarket

03-23-2009, 12:56 PM	#50
porcupinekiller Drives: 2010 GT500 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta Posts: 662	For those that are interested here's a write up in MMFF Magazine where they threw most of the FRPP catalog at a 2006 Mustang GT. Keep in mind that there was no GT500 in 2006. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...car/index.html http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...kes/index.html Here it is with $6500 worth of parts before the intercooler and boost upgrade it ran 12.66 at 107 mph. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...all/index.html

03-23-2009, 06:26 PM	#56
GrnMchin Not easy being Green Drives: 67 Nova SS Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Olympia, WA Posts: 2,256	So I not sure I like the restyled mustang all that much. I liked the last body style a lot better. Seems that last years model had more appeal to me. What are the thought of current Mustang owner on this Forum?