Which generation?

The 2005 GT's have a 4.6 liter V8, 281 c.i., 3 valve heads, aluminum block.

The 1998-2004 GT's have a 4.6 liter V8, 281 c.i., 2 valve heads, aluminum block.

The 2003-2004 Mach 1's have a 4.6 liter V8, 281 c.i., 4 valve heads, aluminum block.

The 2003-2004 SVT Cobra's have a 4.6 liter V8, 281 c.i., 4 valve heads, iron block.

 

The reason they gain so much on tuning is due to Ford running them pig rich from the factory. You can lean it out and gain 20rwhp while stock. Most of the time, Nissan's N/A motors take alot of work to get them to high HP, the turbocharged one's from the factory are usually the easiest.

I know I could reach my goal alot easier in the 2005 Mustang GT, but this is what sold me on the Z: the Mustang will never look as good as the 350Z in stock form, and I will never have the 350Z interior in a Mustang, period.

 

Ford's 4.6 3 valve is DETUNED, our's are not.

 

Yeah, the hypereurectic pistons will give out before 500-550rwhp. We got crap for rods, they got crap for pistons.

 

Actually, this new Mustang is the best Mustang Ford has made so far and i'm sure once some owners get out on the autocross and road course tracks they'll prove it will, at the very least, hold it's own against the 350Z.

 

To add some last comments, I think the 350Z would outperform the Mustang if Nissan would not use the same frame that they use on SUV's and sedans. If it had a unique lighterweight chassis like the Mustang, it would do alot better.

 

The 'stang chasis is lighter, but also must less rigid, which affects the handling...

 

Don't underestimate the '05 Stang...Ford knew they had a performance minded crowd to please (who mostly drag race) and built a very stout solid rear axle to address this. The Ford 8" is legendary.

Many Cobra owners actually complained to SVT when Ford fitted an IRS to the chassis b/c it became the weak link at the strip!

They also built a very torsionally rigid chassis that has already proven itself road race worthy. In fact, I even autocrossed with one recently and the car performed very well.

Ford was able to over-engineer the car b/c they knew they were going to sell a ton of them...but they had to comprimise on making it a dedicated sports car to do so. Nissan built more of a no-comprimise dedicated sports car with a proven powerplant in the Z. Two different approaches/formulas...two different cars/audiences.

 

Not true. We all know that the VQ35 is capable of 300+hp stock, as seen in the 05 track. We also have a speed and throttle governor. I remember hearing someone say a nissan tech said it is capable of up to 320hp stock if tuned correctly.

The problem is, that fixing this is detune a little more complicated than just leaning out the a/f ratio.

 

The Mustang can get 20rwhp from tuning on the ECU, the 350Z can't even get 5rwhp from tuning, enough said. Every car since probably 1996 has a top speed limiter and rev limiter.

 

Good points, I wished they would have went with IRS on the GT500. It would handle alot better on the track, but wouldn't have launched as well on the drag track.

 

Are you serious, the best Mustang? That is the uglyiest damn car I've ever seen! I mean really, don't you have to be 40+ and have a mullet (man or woman) to drive one?

The last mustang was ok, but this new one is god awful! It looks like a freakin TANK.

 

Ok, a couple things here. Was his 600 at the wheels? At lot of the domestic mags show crank HP. The Z car at 400 whp is around 500 crank. And the guys using the APS kit are getting closer to 500 HP (~600 crank).

Realize that the Mustang only has 1.1 liters more than the Z motor. That's really not that different when you start looking at the better flowing Z car motor. Additionally, with the cheaper prices of V8 parts and the willingness to make dragstrip cars, I see many Mustang owners building their engines for racetrack use. Then again, I have yet to go to the dragstrip and not wait directly behind a Mustang that broke.

It never fails. I've even been 1st in line to run some Civic when both of the staging cars were 90s Stangs and both broke.

 

I'm not 40 and I don't have a mullet, but I think the new Mustang is beautiful. If you think the last Mustang was OK and the new one is God awful, you seriously need to take a few design classes.....'cause you ain't got clue right now.

 

i think the new stang is the best looking one sence the classics

 

I have to agree with basam on the new mustang. Have you seen the interior on this thing.....eewwwhhh!

 

How could you own a car with such ayrodynamic harmony as a Z and tell me that the new Mustang is a good design. It seems like the designers of the new Stank are just looking at the old ones, the classics, which I respect and like and are trying to capture some of there presence. I think it's a slapt in the face to the old Mustangs.

I don't have to take a design class to know what is ugly. So ZZtopp, honestly, would you take that car with 100 more hp and trade it for a Z? be honest.

 

I didn't say the best Mustang as far as looks, though, it is IMO.

 

+1. The first car I ever wanted was a first generation Mustang and I love these new one's.

 

No, not with 100 HP more....but I would consider the the upcoming GT 500 w/450+HP (about 170+ more than a stock Z) for under $40,000. That's a helluva deal on a beautiful, high performance car.