The 2011+ Mustang Thread - Page 465

Sax1031 · 06-16-2010, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by assasinator

Livernois Motorsports Tuned 2011 Mustang

391rwhp/385tq

tune only is what i undestand

Quote:

Livernois Motorspsorts Tuned 2011 5.0L Mustang GT. PLEASE NOTE: I talked to our tuner and he accidentally did the first pull in 4th gear. So the actual baseline today after 2,000 + miles was 391 RWHP / 385 RWTQ, but the final numbers were 415 RWHP / 399 RWTQ as posted.

Sounds like to me in the video description he is saying that after 2,000 miles the car put down 391rwhp/385rwtq and after tune it was 415rwhp/399rwtq.

8cd03gro · 06-16-2010, 04:05 PM

Wow, that's impressive.

assasinator · 06-16-2010, 04:11 PM

im at 1500 miles. i AM going to dyno it very soon.

Bob Cosby · 06-16-2010, 04:11 PM

It's hard to imagine that too many people would making their buying decision off of one, two, or even [insert number here] magazine articles that they read - regardless of the outcome. I would suggest that most (most...not all) are biased towards one brand or the other (GM, Ford, Chrysler, or an import), and the most that one of these magazine reviews is going to do is perhaps convince someone to go look at/test driver a vehicle they may not have otherwise considered. Ok, and provide arguement fodder for internet forums.

For me...personally...my priorities/wants/biases are fairly narrow when it comes to my next new car purchase. I do look at the hard numbers generated, but I put more stock in what real-world enthusiasts are getting from the cars. I'll readily admit to being drag racing and lightweight biased. Unfortunately, that narrows the choices down quite a bit.

To each their own.

assasinator · 06-16-2010, 04:13 PM

one thing i have definitely noticed is the car is getting more and more powerful. i remember how it drove off the lot, and its definitely getting out of hand now. maybe running premium, no alchohol 93 octane is why, but its a sure thing.

guiLT · 06-16-2010, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by assasinator

im at 1500 miles. i AM going to dyno it very soon.

Let us know the results.

assasinator · 06-16-2010, 04:14 PM

Bob, as im getting older i am wanting a good quiet ride. this toy is fun, but its no caddy. im going to other way with my tastes. wanting heavier more luxury, and more power.

JusticePete · 06-16-2010, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

Wait, I'm confused. So you already have a '11 GT with brake upgrades, forced induction and suspension? As far as I know, you are the first to have forced induction on a 5.0 other than the few test cars for the forced induction aftermarket giants like whipple and magnacharger, etc. Are you talking about a '10 or a '11? Info please.

2010 S281

THE EVIL TW1N · 06-16-2010, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viral

The article mentions the SS was .2 faster in the 1/4 mile(13.0 vs 13.2) and only .1 slower lap time(1:37.7 vs 1:37.6). That is yet another mainstream review showing the Camaro beating the 5.0 in the 1/4 mile. It's ALMOST exactly the same in lap times too, and that's considering the Mustang had all the performance upgrades you can buy (gearing, brembos, etc) and was $3500 more expensive.

As mentioned many times before, performance metrics are SO close in these cars it's almost a wash. You pretty much have to buy the one that makes your heart race when you see it.

looks like they used 1/4 times from another source. According to the article they tested it on a 1/8mi.

they said they both were running neck and neck run after run.

looking at the video, the 1/8 there was downhill considerably which probably helped the Camaro overcome the inertia of its weight problem better

guiLT · 06-16-2010, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

looks like they used 1/4 times from another source. According to the article they tested it on a 1/8mi.

they said they both were running neck and neck run after run.

looking at the video, the 1/8 there was downhill considerably which probably helped the Camaro overcome the inertia of its weight problem better

That did help the Camaro greatly but it was not the only reason it won.

Maurdib · 06-16-2010, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnvyTerra

I actually found and update on that

http://forums.themustangsource.com/f...a-484441/looks like the final numbers for tune only were. 415/399!
pretty amazing with just a tune, the 5.0 doesn't seem to be as maxed out as we though

man that's like 500hp at the crank from just a tune, WOW

Viral · 06-16-2010, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maurdib

man that's like 500hp at the crank from just a tune, WOW

No doubt. Has any NA car ever picked up nearly 90HP over stock from a tune only?

KungFuHamster · 06-16-2010, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnvyTerra

I actually found and update on that

http://forums.themustangsource.com/f...a-484441/looks like the final numbers for tune only were. 415/399!
pretty amazing with just a tune, the 5.0 doesn't seem to be as maxed out as we though

the 415 hp was accidently done in 4th gear...so the 391 rwhp numbers are the accurate ones (done in 5th gear which is 1:1)

rez333 · 06-16-2010, 05:42 PM

I can't see any pic, but you made the 2nd best choice (the first being the 2011 Shelby GT500). I think the 2010/2011 look heaps better than the 2005-2009. I think the 2005-2009 look cheap: the front looks cheap, the side looks cheap and the back look cheap.

The 2010/2011 look far more sophisticated with its hips, the more complicated body paneling on the side and the Shelby Cobra-like grille. And I for one love the back-side of the 2010 - especially in Shelby form. The 2005-2009 looked like a cheap rectangle. Kind of reminds me of something like a Neon - not in appearance - but in quality. You look at a Neon and it just looks so cheap, and that's my impression when looking at the 2005-2009 rear end. The complex contours of the 2010/2011 adds a level of sophistication and makes it look more like a higher-end sports car.

View Poll Results: .
Camaro	0	0%
Mustang	0	0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

06-16-2010, 04:11 PM	#6499
assasinator 1 n the head,2 n da chest Drives: 2002 cadillac deville Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: huntsville al. Posts: 659	im at 1500 miles. i AM going to dyno it very soon. __________________ 2011GT E85, Kooks 1-7/8", 3" offroad X, 2-7/8" overaxles, Roush mufflers, CobraJet intake, SCJ monoblade throttle body, drew 4.5" CAI, Boss302S exhaust valve springs, Baby CobraJet exhaust cams. 3.73 gears, lightweight 300A. 455rwhp @7800/410rwtq SAE 5000lb roller dynojet

06-16-2010, 04:13 PM	#6501
assasinator 1 n the head,2 n da chest Drives: 2002 cadillac deville Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: huntsville al. Posts: 659	one thing i have definitely noticed is the car is getting more and more powerful. i remember how it drove off the lot, and its definitely getting out of hand now. maybe running premium, no alchohol 93 octane is why, but its a sure thing. __________________ 2011GT E85, Kooks 1-7/8", 3" offroad X, 2-7/8" overaxles, Roush mufflers, CobraJet intake, SCJ monoblade throttle body, drew 4.5" CAI, Boss302S exhaust valve springs, Baby CobraJet exhaust cams. 3.73 gears, lightweight 300A. 455rwhp @7800/410rwtq SAE 5000lb roller dynojet

06-16-2010, 04:14 PM	#6503
assasinator 1 n the head,2 n da chest Drives: 2002 cadillac deville Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: huntsville al. Posts: 659	Bob, as im getting older i am wanting a good quiet ride. this toy is fun, but its no caddy. im going to other way with my tastes. wanting heavier more luxury, and more power. __________________ 2011GT E85, Kooks 1-7/8", 3" offroad X, 2-7/8" overaxles, Roush mufflers, CobraJet intake, SCJ monoblade throttle body, drew 4.5" CAI, Boss302S exhaust valve springs, Baby CobraJet exhaust cams. 3.73 gears, lightweight 300A. 455rwhp @7800/410rwtq SAE 5000lb roller dynojet

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Camaro VS Mustang Mega Thread	Beau Tie	Chevy Camaro vs...	3644	03-09-2012 08:45 PM
Gran Turismo 5... No Camaro?	5thGenOwner	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	111	12-06-2011 11:06 AM
Official 2011 Mustang GT info released	nester7929	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	81	12-28-2009 04:13 PM

06-16-2010, 04:05 PM	#6498
8cd03gro Drives: 2005 STi corn fed Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,997	Wow, that's impressive.

06-16-2010, 04:11 PM	#6500
Bob Cosby Drives: 2010 Vette Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Knoxville, TN Posts: 572	It's hard to imagine that too many people would making their buying decision off of one, two, or even [insert number here] magazine articles that they read - regardless of the outcome. I would suggest that most (most...not all) are biased towards one brand or the other (GM, Ford, Chrysler, or an import), and the most that one of these magazine reviews is going to do is perhaps convince someone to go look at/test driver a vehicle they may not have otherwise considered. Ok, and provide arguement fodder for internet forums. For me...personally...my priorities/wants/biases are fairly narrow when it comes to my next new car purchase. I do look at the hard numbers generated, but I put more stock in what real-world enthusiasts are getting from the cars. I'll readily admit to being drag racing and lightweight biased. Unfortunately, that narrows the choices down quite a bit. To each their own.

06-16-2010, 05:42 PM	#6510
rez333 Drives: 2013 ZL1 Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: St. Joseph Posts: 1,283	I can't see any pic, but you made the 2nd best choice (the first being the 2011 Shelby GT500). I think the 2010/2011 look heaps better than the 2005-2009. I think the 2005-2009 look cheap: the front looks cheap, the side looks cheap and the back look cheap. The 2010/2011 look far more sophisticated with its hips, the more complicated body paneling on the side and the Shelby Cobra-like grille. And I for one love the back-side of the 2010 - especially in Shelby form. The 2005-2009 looked like a cheap rectangle. Kind of reminds me of something like a Neon - not in appearance - but in quality. You look at a Neon and it just looks so cheap, and that's my impression when looking at the 2005-2009 rear end. The complex contours of the 2010/2011 adds a level of sophistication and makes it look more like a higher-end sports car.