Hollywood_North GT

rrobello is right, the driver's skill is a big part of the equation.

Because by any definition, you can't call the Mustang a "slow" car. And there is little coming out of Japan right now that can touch it.

Now, admittedly that will change when the Nissan GT-R and Lexus LF-A arrive on the scene, but they are competing with the Porsche 911 Turbos of the world - with prices to match.

And speaking of Porsche, anything from Europe that can beat the Mustang GT costs one helluva lot more money.

In terms of HP per dollar, the Mustang GT smokes any other car in the world, to the best of my knowledge.

I will concede that you're probably losing about two or three-tenths of a second due to having the automatic (which isn't the best shifting auto on the market), but even still, there's no way a stock Galant would have a chance against a Mustang GT. No way.

CaptainAmerica

OK, so this may sound sacrilegious (especially since I am on a stang board) but maybe the way to think about this is; our cars are "pretty fast" but not screaming fast, but we can probably get eaten alive by several imports, and BMW's (maybe 335 Coupe or Audi S4). Our cars looks fantastic but are not performance cars without tons of ca$h sunk into the car. Is this the way to look at it?

metroplex

If you take that up a notch with the GT500, be aware that the base 07 C6 Corvette has the same weight to power ratio as the GT500, and the 07 Z06 has an even smaller weight to power ratio based on the fact it weighs nearly 1000 lb less than the GT500 but makes as much horsepower. That's a force to be reckoned with.

The Mustang GT is an affordable sports car.

uberPony

Dangerous opponent? Dangerous?
It is a freaking 2.0 liter.
I would have been embarrassed as hell to lose to a riceburning sedan!
The Mustang has pretty decent stock performance but obviously it is no factory race car when you get smoked by a Galant.

That is why forced induction is so popular because the stock Mustang is mediocre in performance, there are many faster cars out there..

Knight

I guess you don't know anything about the 4g64 engine. There are people with this engine that have hit 1000awhp.

I'd like to see even one person with a 4.6 3v that can say they have 1000rwhp.

metroplex

Forced induction is popular for small engines like the 4.6L V8, that's why Ford relies on a blower for its GT and GT500. The Chevrolet Corvette's 6.0L makes 400 fwhp on a 3100+ lb chassis, while the Z06's 7.0L V8 makes 500 fwhp (naturally aspirated) on a 3100+ lb chassis, roughly 800-1000 lb lighter than a GT500. Our S197s have two disadvantages: too much weight, and small displacement OHC engines.

The moral of the story is, anyone can make any car run fast. You can make a Pinto run 8 seconds in the 1/4 mile, just like someone can make a snowmobile run 10 seconds or a backhoe run 10 seconds. The limiting factors are your wallet and imagination.

CaptainAmerica

Well said Metro.....

rrobello

here is what you and most of the guys are into imports that down a 1000HP import are wrong and what those owners soon find out. Yes you can make several Japanese motors handle 1000HP, but thats just the motor and even then its not a sure thing, especially as a daily driver, most of those cars are dyno queens, garaged show cars or race cars that get rebuilt periodically after racing or drifting. If the forged internals can hold up, (and again not forever) then you have to worry about the transmission, driveshaft, axle, ect. that were never built to handle such power and when romped on will break sooner than later. And then you also have the issue of most of these cars completely wasting that power making them still too slow for that HP because the wheel wells were never made to house a tire wide enough to get that power to the road. I know of a couple local Supras pushing 900+HP and they are complete dyno queens and still barely break into the 9s on occasion because all they do is spin their tires with the biggest meat they can fit. I also have a couple friends with Skylines and a S15 and even the Skyline isnt an exception to breaking under such abuse. Bottom line when cranked up, all cars take so much abuse when used for what they are built for it is only a matter of time before they break, otherwise they just become hopped up paper weights sitting in a garage.


that statement is so wrong on several levels. I agree that these cars arent screaming fast out of the box, but they arent slow either and can be made very sporty and perform very well with very little money put into them. And to compare to a 335 or S4 you are shooting very low, Id say those are closer comparisons to the V6 not the GT. The GTs will run circles around both of those cars without a problem, stock.

Knight

yeah i guess you don't know anything about these cars either. These are the guys that built the 1000awhp 4g63 evo.

http://www.amsperformance.com/projects.php

local shop... 4 of the cars in the 9's a couple real low 9's...and i know for a fact they drive the white one that runs 9.33 in the 1/4 on the street.

and if you go down the list you will see one car that has 1041awhp.

heres their shop cars too.
http://www.amsperformance.com/amsshopcars.php

8.97 sec in the 1/4

97svtgoin05gt

I agree with you BC. This is a much more realistic overview describing what really is true. Cars such as the 350Z or it's Infinity cousin should be feared somewhat if you're going from a roll especially if you're dead stock. Thing is, they're all several thousand more to purchase. For a couple thousand, you can eliminate this issue. Cars like the EVO or WRX you need to be basically an excellent driver and stock you'll probably still suck wind. Once again though, these cars are more expensive, generally about $4,000 more. You can do a lot under the hood of a stock GT for $4,000. Flat out beware of Corvettes unless you have a decent set of mods cookin. I haven't had the pleasure of meeting a Charger yet, but my sense is that a standard Hemi Charger shouldn't be a problem SRT....another thing entirely.

97svtgoin05gt

What's the cost to build these things and what can you accomplish with a similar Ford?

Hollywood_North GT

THANK YOU, 97svtgoin05gt, you just made my point for me, and that is this >>

Any comparisons must be made using a stock vs. stock benchmark, otherwise this thread is completely useless.

Sure, you can mod up a 2.0L four-banger and it will toast a Mustang GT. But put the same money into a Mustang GT, and it's game over for the little high-revving wheezer. And if you boost a four-banger's pressure way beyond what is sensible, prepare yourself for regular reliability issues and rebuilds...and the likelihood of grenading your engine - more $$ still.

Remember the golden rule: There's no replacement for displacement. Except, of course, for greatly reduced weight.

"Mediocre performance"? "Many faster cars..."? I don't think so. Once again, the bottom line is this: The Mustang GT is capable of hitting 60 in 4.9 seconds bone stock (Road & Track test). Let's make a list right here of cars within $10K of the Mustang's price range that can equal or beat that >>

Anyone...?

Hollywood_North GT

For those of you who think the Mustang GT is "slow," I suggest you all read this.

"Mediocre" my a$$!

Though I do find their 370 HP claim a bit suspicious.

rrobello

uhmmm isnt that what I said, boost the hell out of it, tons of money spent on mods so it can handle the HP and you only get into the 9s with 1000HP, SAD!!!! You can break into the 9s with much less power and money in a stang, and other American cars, I dont know lets say a corvette....STOCK! The point is that stock for stock and mod for mod, there isnt an import car that can touch the Mustang, especially when you factor in the price. and again anything much over 500rwhp in those cars makes them not a daily driver anymore. Where as Mustangs are very compfortable at much more than that. The latest 5.0 Mustang Mag has a 810rwhp streetable GT. He got to 577HP on stock internals with very little work. In the last MM&FF they show Evolution Performance getting the GT500 (I know we are now onto a different car) to 615rwhp and 646rwtq with only headers, exhaust, intake, pulley and a tune, then they switched out the pulley again, increased the boost and gave it a 75hp shot of Nitrous and hit 665rwhp and 778rwtq and was the first (and now not only) GT500 to break the 9s, my point is that it wasnt hard and didnt take much. There are many S197 GTs running in the 9s, no prob and are comfortable and realiable to drive on the street and for a hell of a lot cheaper than it took to get that Evo into the 9s. I have many friends with streetable 600+HP stangs, and a couple over 800rwhp. One of them is that Turbod Mach 1 in the same MM&FF issue.

I was very impressed with my car the first time I took it onto a road course. With only an intake and muffler delete back then, no suspension mods, I was running only a couple tenths of a second slower than the Lotus Elise on the track.


uhmmmmmmmmmm.....................uhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmm......

rrobello

wait I got........no wait...nm.............uhmmmmmmmmmmmm

FRITZ

And don't forget ... the Mustang GT sounds AWSOME !!!

CaptainAmerica

Now THAT, is totally true. I might be the only guy here who thinks this but when I jump on it, my car feels like it wants to go faster (quicker), sounds like the engine is working hard, but I'm just not going that fast in the low RPM's.

Knight

Ok i thought you were saying that it couldn't be done reliably. Of course the stang can make more power on less boost given its displacment advantage.

And it didn't take 1000rwhp to get in the 9's with those cars.. but the one with 944rwhp is doing 8's.

Its hard to say if one is "better" then anther.. its just different strokes for different folks.

I would take the stang.

Cheese302

Wow, amazing how quickly this thread turns into whos Phalus is bigger.

however the only thing i am going to add in my opinion if your going to compare the S4 and 335iC to a mustang. I believe it is a closer comparison to the mustang v8. since the s4 runs a v8 that is rated at 340hp, and the 335iC is running a 300hp twin turbo inline six. as for whats fastest. the mustang is set up to go in a straight line really well, but jury's out for the twisties. in my book anyway

i do agree though, a true comparison is a stock to stock comparison.

CaptainAmerica

OK, someone jumped on my for trying to compare a 330i Coupe (300HP) to the Stang. I still think it would be interesting (stock vs. stock) in the 1/4 mile, then in twisties. Then add a $1500 mod budget and re-race. Which do you think would win?