Fast as stock Mustang GT.
07-03-2002, 11:48 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fast as stock Mustang GT.
For all of you wondering if this car will move out. It is as fast as a mustang gt. That is as fast as anyone on the road should be going. It will be enough power to get ya in plenty of trouble.
5.4 to 60 14.1 1/4 mile.
5.4 to 60 14.1 1/4 mile.
07-04-2002, 12:06 AM
#2
Re: Fast as stock Mustang GT.
Originally posted by silvrz5
For all of you wondering if this car will move out. It is as fast as a mustang gt. That is as fast as anyone on the road should be going. It will be enough power to get ya in plenty of trouble.
5.4 to 60 14.1 1/4 mile.
For all of you wondering if this car will move out. It is as fast as a mustang gt. That is as fast as anyone on the road should be going. It will be enough power to get ya in plenty of trouble.
5.4 to 60 14.1 1/4 mile.
07-04-2002, 12:09 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NO the Z is FASTER than a stock Mustang GT!
Not sure where you got your figures. These are from the Road & Track website:
Mustang GT - 0-60 = 6.0, 1/4 = 14.7
01 Cobra 5.6 14.2
01 Bullitt 5.8 14.3
And the Z will be faster than my modified 1995 5.0 Mustang GT
although I just can't part with it. The Z really delivers excellent performance numbers for the price. If I could just receive my confirmation and packet.
Not sure where you got your figures. These are from the Road & Track website:
Mustang GT - 0-60 = 6.0, 1/4 = 14.7
01 Cobra 5.6 14.2
01 Bullitt 5.8 14.3
And the Z will be faster than my modified 1995 5.0 Mustang GT
although I just can't part with it. The Z really delivers excellent performance numbers for the price. If I could just receive my confirmation and packet.
07-04-2002, 12:52 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torque = quick...
HP= fast......and yes, there is a difference between the two.
Torque doesn't mean crap if a high HP number is not in the cards.
E46 M3: 333 HP/ ~260 lbs/torque. 0-60 4.7 sec
Honda S2000: 240 HP/153 lbs/torque. 0-60 5.5 sec.
It's not a moot point. Honda would be out of business otherwise since most of their engines have a low torque:HP ratio.
HP-torque relationship....
HP= fast......and yes, there is a difference between the two.
Torque doesn't mean crap if a high HP number is not in the cards.
E46 M3: 333 HP/ ~260 lbs/torque. 0-60 4.7 sec
Honda S2000: 240 HP/153 lbs/torque. 0-60 5.5 sec.
It's not a moot point. Honda would be out of business otherwise since most of their engines have a low torque:HP ratio.
HP-torque relationship....
07-04-2002, 01:08 AM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
A stock Mustang GT goes 0-60 in 5.6 (MotorTrend)
so, until MT does the time for the Z...............as for 6 sec. times for the GT! lol- if you don't know how to race (jk)
the new Cobra's have 4.5-4.8 times to 60 at $32,000
poor little Camaros! They have been plain jane as of late, now their dead & they can't even claim any type of superiority of the Mustang anymore lol
IMO the GT is maybe .1 slower than the Z
so, until MT does the time for the Z...............as for 6 sec. times for the GT! lol- if you don't know how to race (jk)
the new Cobra's have 4.5-4.8 times to 60 at $32,000
poor little Camaros! They have been plain jane as of late, now their dead & they can't even claim any type of superiority of the Mustang anymore lol
IMO the GT is maybe .1 slower than the Z
07-04-2002, 01:13 AM
#7
Registered User
I have a Mustang GT V8. I'll be honest with you, if the Z is as fast I will be very happy. If it's faster that's a bonus. And remember, the Z will no doubt have many mods available in the coming months.
Trending Topics
07-04-2002, 02:04 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mr. 25/8
A stock Mustang GT goes 0-60 in 5.6 (MotorTrend)
the new Cobra's have 4.5-4.8 times to 60 at $32,000
A stock Mustang GT goes 0-60 in 5.6 (MotorTrend)
the new Cobra's have 4.5-4.8 times to 60 at $32,000
07-04-2002, 02:09 AM
#11
Originally posted by mr. 25/8
A stock Mustang GT goes 0-60 in 5.6 (MotorTrend)
the new Cobra's have 4.5-4.8 times to 60 at $32,000
A stock Mustang GT goes 0-60 in 5.6 (MotorTrend)
the new Cobra's have 4.5-4.8 times to 60 at $32,000
07-04-2002, 02:45 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bozeman, Montana
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the bullitt mustang had only 270hp, the 03 cobra has 390hp and 390lbft. Theres a big difference.
I think the 03 cobra is a good performer, as is the 350Z.
I think the 03 cobra is a good performer, as is the 350Z.
07-04-2002, 03:29 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Richmond, Canada
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i've seen a cobra in some magazine(forget which one) that the article contrasted vette, cobra and something like the 911 and showed a chart of time and things like that, i really liked that cobra but i didn't see that version on the street, the most unique thing on that cobra was that it had a mp3 style spoiler on and was really cool. Maybe it is the cobra GTR version?
07-04-2002, 03:39 AM
#14
I've never seen a bone stock Mustang GT run a 14.1 at the track, EVER. Sure they have a lot of torque, but it dies off quickly. If the driver is good, they can pull a 14.5, but never a 14.1. Plus the trap speeds on the Mustangs are weak since they have no top end power.
07-04-2002, 07:32 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cobras
My stock 99 Cobra is rated at 0-60 @ 5.4; 1/4 @ 13.9/102.4
If the stock Z is rated at 0-60 @ 5.4; 1/4@ 14.1/101, then you will have no trouble taking a stock Mustang GT. I certainly certainly have no problems.
If the stock Z is rated at 0-60 @ 5.4; 1/4@ 14.1/101, then you will have no trouble taking a stock Mustang GT. I certainly certainly have no problems.
07-04-2002, 07:54 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know three people who are into mustangs and take them to the quarter track. They will not run 14.1 stock. A buddy of mine with a 96, with several mods including a supercharger is only in the high 13s and was running 14.6 stock.
The late gen mustangs will run around 14 flat with about a grand in stuff, mostly to help them hook up.
The upcoming mach1 on the other hand, MSRP is 30k, and Ford pre-production model ran mid 13s stock, and 12.9 with slicks. That is impressive.
Of course, you can't go a mile on any road without seeing 3 late model mustangs, and they are not known for handling prowess. I still think the Z is a good performance deal.
The late gen mustangs will run around 14 flat with about a grand in stuff, mostly to help them hook up.
The upcoming mach1 on the other hand, MSRP is 30k, and Ford pre-production model ran mid 13s stock, and 12.9 with slicks. That is impressive.
Of course, you can't go a mile on any road without seeing 3 late model mustangs, and they are not known for handling prowess. I still think the Z is a good performance deal.
07-04-2002, 08:01 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PistolPete
I know three people who are into mustangs and take them to the quarter track. They will not run 14.1 stock. A buddy of mine with a 96, with several mods including a supercharger is only in the high 13s and was running 14.6 stock.
The late gen mustangs will run around 14 flat with about a grand in stuff, mostly to help them hook up.
The upcoming mach1 on the other hand, MSRP is 30k, and Ford pre-production model ran mid 13s stock, and 12.9 with slicks. That is impressive.
Of course, you can't go a mile on any road without seeing 3 late model mustangs, and they are not known for handling prowess. I still think the Z is a good performance deal.
I know three people who are into mustangs and take them to the quarter track. They will not run 14.1 stock. A buddy of mine with a 96, with several mods including a supercharger is only in the high 13s and was running 14.6 stock.
The late gen mustangs will run around 14 flat with about a grand in stuff, mostly to help them hook up.
The upcoming mach1 on the other hand, MSRP is 30k, and Ford pre-production model ran mid 13s stock, and 12.9 with slicks. That is impressive.
Of course, you can't go a mile on any road without seeing 3 late model mustangs, and they are not known for handling prowess. I still think the Z is a good performance deal.
1) Handling
2) Braking
3) Reliability
4) Fit/Finish
5) Quality of materials
6) Features (guages, VCD, etc.)
7) Horsepower
As a former Mustang owner, I feel confident the Z will be twice the car the Mustang is.
I'd say the SVT Mustang is great for collectors, but not for actually driving.
07-04-2002, 08:52 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a shame that ford cant get more power out of the Mustang GT. I actually considered buying one until i checked out the spect. From an engine that size they should be able to crank out more horsepower. The problem is that the compression ratio is only 8.5:1, which in the end will mean, less power for the gas it burns, ford engineers need to step it up a notch
07-04-2002, 08:54 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by madmonkey
It's a shame that ford cant get more power out of the Mustang GT. I actually considered buying one until i checked out the spect. From an engine that size they should be able to crank out more horsepower. The problem is that the compression ratio is only 8.5:1, which in the end will mean, less power for the gas it burns, ford engineers need to step it up a notch
It's a shame that ford cant get more power out of the Mustang GT. I actually considered buying one until i checked out the spect. From an engine that size they should be able to crank out more horsepower. The problem is that the compression ratio is only 8.5:1, which in the end will mean, less power for the gas it burns, ford engineers need to step it up a notch
The handling is some of the worst around. Fit & Finish is abysmal. Quality is awful. Ergonomics, well all of the reviewers talk about how lousy they are.
Forget it. Ford is in terrible financial and legal trouble for a reason: they suck.
07-04-2002, 09:50 AM
#20
Charter Member #53
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: ATL/Auburn U.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PistolPete
I know three people who are into mustangs and take them to the quarter track. They will not run 14.1 stock. A buddy of mine with a 96, with several mods including a supercharger is only in the high 13s and was running 14.6 stock.
The late gen mustangs will run around 14 flat with about a grand in stuff, mostly to help them hook up.
The upcoming mach1 on the other hand, MSRP is 30k, and Ford pre-production model ran mid 13s stock, and 12.9 with slicks. That is impressive.
Of course, you can't go a mile on any road without seeing 3 late model mustangs, and they are not known for handling prowess. I still think the Z is a good performance deal.
I know three people who are into mustangs and take them to the quarter track. They will not run 14.1 stock. A buddy of mine with a 96, with several mods including a supercharger is only in the high 13s and was running 14.6 stock.
The late gen mustangs will run around 14 flat with about a grand in stuff, mostly to help them hook up.
The upcoming mach1 on the other hand, MSRP is 30k, and Ford pre-production model ran mid 13s stock, and 12.9 with slicks. That is impressive.
Of course, you can't go a mile on any road without seeing 3 late model mustangs, and they are not known for handling prowess. I still think the Z is a good performance deal.
They are bringing back the Mach 1???? (check my sig)