Pain to launch? I've seen average guys ripping off 1.9 60fts bone stock...

Your 350Z must be a cakewalk because I can take a mustang down the track and do much better than I can with my car off the line.

As far as 1/4 times...Evan Smith ran a 13.3 @ 103mph with a stock GT and someone recently posted proof of his friend going 13.2 in the 1/4... It's still a tight race against the 350Z but I would put my money on the 350Z (IF someone like Veetec is driving) otherwise your average drivers behind the wheel and the mustang is going to win 9 out of 10. They are just too easy to drive.

 

I was posting what I'd read on mustangforums. I've never dragged a Mustang (myself driving the mustang) to really know, but locally I've also never seen a stock mustang run anything below a 13.5. I know it happens, but I think its the same either way. All season crap tires don't help you launch. A GTO is another example of a car held back by terrible factory tires.

 

I don't know
There was GT at our private track rental, a friend of mine
He has the newer Mustang and he could not get below 13.9 to save his life.
Given he is not the worlds greatest driver, but he is not bad at all.

That was the Same night Shifty 711 got his 13.55 and hit the top 25.
So it was a good track night, and the Mustang could not pull on Mike.

 

I don't believe a stock GT will run anything better than a 13.5. There is such a huge aftermarket for Mustang and they are so mod friendly that someone can easily put a mod on a Mustang for cheap and run a low 13. Then say it's stock to try and look good.

Unless you've personally ran better than a 13.5 and know your Mustang was stock or you know the Mustang so well that you would notice any mod on it and checked every part on the car that you seen run better than 13.5, then I wouldn't believe it. FYI, friends lie too, especially to try and look good to other friends.

Also, I posted the link to the Mustang forums up above. Find me a Mustang there with a "100% stock" time better than 13.5 then post the link to their car information page here...

 

Good points...

Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords tested an 05 Mustang GT (Evan Smith driving) and went 13.3 @ 103mph on a 1.8 60ft...I am looking for the article now and will try to post it up.

 

Yeah, I'd like to see that. If it's true then that's about the best a Mustang is going to see probably given that it ran a 1.8 60'. You just can't expect any better than that on stock radial street tires for any car. But even with that 13.3xx it's still more than .1 slower than the best stock Z time we've seen and Veetec didn't even break into the 1.8's on his 60'. Plus the 103 mph trap speed says something too... Hopefully the article has the entire timeslip.

 

i dont know who told you stock mustang tires are slippery, they are the easiest mustang to date to get oout of the hole.

with just a 93 octane tune and a cai there is a local guy that ran 12.7 here @ over 107mph

 

A 93 octane tune adds quite a bit of power to those cars. But in any case... overall time says nothing about his launch. What's his 60'? That will determine if his tires are gripping or not. Maybe his tires slipped a lot and he pulled a 2.3 60' and would've ran a 12.2 if they hadn't (doubtful, just making a point).

I don't have an opinion either way on the launch. But if some guy pulled a 1.8 60' like S8ER95Z said, then they're obviously not slippery. My dispute is about a 100% stock Mustang running 13.5 or better.

 

1.81 i believe....the cars run strong. its just that no one leaves them stock long enough to know. why would you when you really pick up 4 or so mph and a more responsive car with the torque management crap tuned out and a cold air kit

and overall if you cant figure out that he is in the 1.7-1.8 range to run 12.7 @ 107 then you dont have that much 1/4 experience

 

But you do and you don't even post more information AND post info about a car that's not even stock? Please... Also, 1.7... not on stock tires. If you think that's possible on a stock Mustang, Camaro, or any other car in that price range then you're lacking the experience bud.

12.7@107 says nothing about anything other than where he finished, not where he started. Veetec ran a 13.2xx @ 107 so what does that mean his 60' was?

In my experience .1 in 60' is .15-.2 in the 1/4. Some others have said that .1 in 60' to them is more like .1 in the end to them. So we'll use the latter for this example since it gives the benefit of the doubt.

13.2-12.7 = .5 difference in 1/4 times at the same trap speed

1.8 (presumed Stang 60') + .5 (presumed 60' difference @ .1 per 1/4 diff)= 2.3

So I guess Veetec ran a 2.3 60'... LOL

Either this isn't as easy as you thought, or that Mustang was nowhere near that time at that trap speed with that 60'...

If I had used .15 or .2 it would have been even worse. So show me how I can possibly figure the 60' on a car that I have never driven and that most of us obviously know very little about since nobody can post a single link to list of stock Mustangs running these "unbelievable" times.

 

You know not all cars accelerate at the same pace? Maybe the Z Accelerates on certain rpm ranges while the mustang accelerated evenly throughout the whole thing? What Im tryin to imply is not all cars have the same acceleratin, so you cannot compare times like that.

 

I'm fully aware of that, which is the point I was trying to make (In a more arrogant manner since he disrespected me). How can you figure the 60' of a completely different car that you know little about?

 

Mustangs have more torque....so they "generally" (don't jump down my throat on this people) have slower back halfs.

 

This 12.84 second GT is a regular at Cecil County Dragway, Rising Sun, MD. All-motor. Automatic transmission.

 

BS. That's not 100% stock. Exhaust, CAI, and a tune would still be "all engine". This is about stock Mustangs, not modded...

I raced a 05 GT last Thursday which had a supercharger and only ran a 12.4. He said he usually ran a 12.0, and I could see from his slip that he wasn't lying. He just had a bad launch (even my 60' was better than his). So going from stock to a Vortech SC only gains .8 seconds on a Mustang... right.

I'm going to spend the next couple of hours on the Mustang forums just to end this debate, then post links to the proper threads on the forums.

 

Here's one thread at the Mustang forums:

http://www.mustangforums.com/m_934493/tm.htm#(post #2)

This is a "modded" s197 who ran 13.089@103.03 60'=1.84. That's not even close to a 12.7 like someone else stated, and not even stock. But the same trap speed and 60'... Seem funny? That's the only reason I linked that, it's also the first thread in their s197 1/4 mile times, LOL.


Here's a bone stock 05' GT s197 5-speed:

http://www.mustangforums.com/m_93449...3/key_/tm.htm#(post #52)

13.959@103.37mph 2.142 60' Do the math. If you drop the 60' to 1.8 that means a .35 increase.

@ .1 per 60' .1 that would put the 1/4 at 13.6.
@ .15 per 60' .1 that would put the 1/4 at 13.425.
@ .2 per 60' .1 that would put the 1/4 at 13.25.

Hardly in the 12's. Also still doesn't beat the top 2 times on our list even @ .2 per. Don't worry, I'm not done yet...


Ok, here's the end all be all...

http://www.mustangforums.com/m_93449...3/key_/tm.htm#(post #55)

Note: 1.8 60ft on street tires is insane!!!! but possible

Note: very rare, but possible to better a 13.5 in stock GT, but I know of one that got a 13.3 with 1.8 60ft and cold temps.

These are the absolute best times set from a much larger group of racers than we have here at our forums. Even with that, we still have stock times below theirs and our HR motors have only been out for 13 months, not a few years like theirs. That being said, I think it's safe to say that the HR Z is faster stock than a s197 Mustang GT. You can't dispute the facts taken from the mouth of the Mustang guys themselves... So it seems I was wrong about my 13.5, but at the same time I was right. Very rarely and only in cold temperatures does the s197 GT break 13.5's.

Edit: links not working right. They go to the right page, but at the top... so I added the post #'s.

 

Hmmmmm? very compelling info.

 

Good work. No doubt about it in my mind anymore. Personal experience of beating enough GT's of the 2005+ variety was good enough for me and I'm no drag racer (Pre-popcharger if it ever matters). Debate is over...

 

Too bad those v8's respond to mods REALLY well. I track my car on a weekly basis and get my A$$ handed by GT's ever so often.
Lightly modded GT's are running deep in the 12's in my area. Cam'd GT's with 20" chrome wheels are running 12's
I guess stock for stock the Z has somewhat of an edge but your average Z driver will not pull low 13's.
Most of the guys who hit sub 13.5's on the list goto the drag strip religiously.

 

I had no luck finding the actual article (email primemedia to see if they can track it down for me)... Nice info..

FWIW two people on mustangforums.com have ticked 12.8~12.9 ~ 106~107mph with CAI/Tune only in cold wether. American Speed is one and Gene K is the other (Street/Strip section has their info posted.)