Ricers
Mach 1 Member
Joined: June 29, 2004
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
uhhhh, now that i think of it, didnt the FORD Corsair have a v4 engine????
Yup, heres a layout of the motor, and the link to a site if nobody believes me!
Ford Corsair V4
sorry, getting a little off topic.
Yup, heres a layout of the motor, and the link to a site if nobody believes me!
Ford Corsair V4
sorry, getting a little off topic.
Team Mustang Source
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Ok, I saved the Article from MM & FF including all the specs and all the pictures when they had it on their website for free:
"We always like surprises, so you can imagine our delight when the corpulent GT ran a 14.183 at 96.92 right off the bat. We knew it felt strong, but we figured the extra weight of the Mach 1000 sound system, coupled with the slow-shifting automatic, would hinder its performance. Not too bad, we'd say. When its second pass was an even better 14.095 at 96.64, we immediately went to work pulling the spare and jack. Surely, there must be 13 here somewhere, no?
No. We backed up the 0.9 with another 14.18, then a 14.144 at 97.25, but our quest for the 13s went unfulfilled.
The first Stang to run after the GT's 14.183 was the Cobra. Now, we heard that a famous West Coast magazine tested a Cobra coupe and went an altitude corrected 13.30 at 109. Surely, with a convertible we had our work cut out for us. Which made test driver Evan Smith's 12.778 at 111-flat quite rewarding. He tried a quick backup pass, but missed a shift. Imagine our surprise when the ragtop Cobra still ran a 13.07 at 107.44. There must have been something wrong with that other magazine's test car. We finished the convertible's day with a 12.966 at 109.17. It wasn't the 12.50 we were hoping for, but we decided to call it a day after that.
As much fun as the Mach 1 was on the road course, it was even more thrilling in the quarter-mile. Successfully juggle the combination of fabulous torque, 3.55 gears and fat Goodyears and you will get a nifty timeslip. Smith did and picked up a 13.156 at 105.35 (2.03 60-foot). We tried bettering that, but couldn't. Still, it ran a 13.256, and a 13.334 (spinning badly), both at over 105 mph (best of 105.98)."
If you want the whole article, the specific car stats, or the pictures, let me know.
On a different note, what PearBear is trying to say is that instead of making post after post, make one post, and utilize the edit feature until you get it the way you like it (4 times for this particular post on my part). And if you are going to make statements that seem out of the norm (such as 11sec 1/4 times) it would be a lot more credible to have the facts to support your claim.
"We always like surprises, so you can imagine our delight when the corpulent GT ran a 14.183 at 96.92 right off the bat. We knew it felt strong, but we figured the extra weight of the Mach 1000 sound system, coupled with the slow-shifting automatic, would hinder its performance. Not too bad, we'd say. When its second pass was an even better 14.095 at 96.64, we immediately went to work pulling the spare and jack. Surely, there must be 13 here somewhere, no?
No. We backed up the 0.9 with another 14.18, then a 14.144 at 97.25, but our quest for the 13s went unfulfilled.
The first Stang to run after the GT's 14.183 was the Cobra. Now, we heard that a famous West Coast magazine tested a Cobra coupe and went an altitude corrected 13.30 at 109. Surely, with a convertible we had our work cut out for us. Which made test driver Evan Smith's 12.778 at 111-flat quite rewarding. He tried a quick backup pass, but missed a shift. Imagine our surprise when the ragtop Cobra still ran a 13.07 at 107.44. There must have been something wrong with that other magazine's test car. We finished the convertible's day with a 12.966 at 109.17. It wasn't the 12.50 we were hoping for, but we decided to call it a day after that.
As much fun as the Mach 1 was on the road course, it was even more thrilling in the quarter-mile. Successfully juggle the combination of fabulous torque, 3.55 gears and fat Goodyears and you will get a nifty timeslip. Smith did and picked up a 13.156 at 105.35 (2.03 60-foot). We tried bettering that, but couldn't. Still, it ran a 13.256, and a 13.334 (spinning badly), both at over 105 mph (best of 105.98)."
If you want the whole article, the specific car stats, or the pictures, let me know.
On a different note, what PearBear is trying to say is that instead of making post after post, make one post, and utilize the edit feature until you get it the way you like it (4 times for this particular post on my part). And if you are going to make statements that seem out of the norm (such as 11sec 1/4 times) it would be a lot more credible to have the facts to support your claim.
Thread Starter
GTR Member
Joined: October 30, 2004
Posts: 4,999
Likes: 0
2004-2003 cobra times and such/article
Check out that link, they ran quick with the cobra.
here ya go
Check out that link, they ran quick with the cobra.
When the first GTs were hitting the streets around Christmas of 1993 with a whopping 215 hp, who would have envisioned that a decade later you'd be able to stroll into your local SVT dealer and buy a new Cobra (with a supercharger, no less) and run 12.40s at 113 right off the showroom floor without so much as a tire-pressure adjustment?
here ya go
Team Mustang Source
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
What a few of us are trying to point out is that 12.40's are nowhere near 11's. There is a big difference going from 16 or 15 second 1/4 mile, to a 14 of 13 1/4 mile in N/A mustangs of the last decade. Those can be done with minor work, bolt-ons, new tread, better exhaust, etc. However going from a 12 second to an 11 second is nowhere near as easy. The faster it is, the much harder it is go EVEN faster.
Cobras are made (for the most part) with the accesories you would put on a non-SVT Mustang to make it go faster. That is the whole point. That is why when you look at Supercars, they are posting numbers that you are talking about, but for much more money. The faster you go, the harder and more expensive it gets.
For Example(Scroll down for stats column):
2005 Ford GT
http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordgt.html
2003 Ford Mustang Cobra Coupe
http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/03fordcobra.html
This is a pretty reliable source. I am not saying what you are claiming is impossible, or super hard, I think most of us here just think it's not as easy as you think it might be.
Cobras are made (for the most part) with the accesories you would put on a non-SVT Mustang to make it go faster. That is the whole point. That is why when you look at Supercars, they are posting numbers that you are talking about, but for much more money. The faster you go, the harder and more expensive it gets.
For Example(Scroll down for stats column):
2005 Ford GT
http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/fordgt.html
2003 Ford Mustang Cobra Coupe
http://www.fast-autos.net/ford/03fordcobra.html
This is a pretty reliable source. I am not saying what you are claiming is impossible, or super hard, I think most of us here just think it's not as easy as you think it might be.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Shea
General Vehicle Discussion/News
23
Sep 10, 2004 07:32 PM