Hollywood_North GT

Uh...I bet I don't.

jarradasay

I have personally seen three of them edge out a WS-6 in the 1/4 at US 41 drag strip here in Indiana. two of them had Mopar's stage one upgrade and one had the stage two upgrade, which are stock options. All still cheaper then the 05+. I don't know any of us that can take a stock stang and beat a WS-6. There is the driver arguement (although all three SRTs were driven by different drivers) and I don't know the ETs. But I think many of us are underestimating them. Especially after dodge added the LSD to the frontend. I have to agree tho, that in the end you still have an Ugly neon. I don't want one, but you can't argue the performance and affordability.
My personal opinion is that 0-60 times provided are worthless, because typical drivers will never approach those numbers. How many of us can actually get our mustangs to do 4.9, my personal best is 5.4. Most typical drivers have to rely on continued torque and horsepower through the mid-range to win a race. (I know...all of us enthusiasts are pro's) That is where the turbo pocket rockets have the advantage.

Wouldn't trade either of my stangs for one tho.

Knight

you cannot consider those stage upgrades stock. and without providing 1/4 mile times...one car beating another is irrelevant.

cause i have a friend with a 01 WS6 auto and it onyl ran 14 flat and i know the most peoples 05 are faster then that.

jarradasay

Why not? It is provided and covered by Chrysler as stock under stock warranty and it still costs less then a mustang. It's not a stage kit from an aftermarket company.

Isn't one car beating another what it is all about? Who cares about trap times and ETs. If you beat me then you beat me. You can't count this... you have to consider that... but if... etc, Always looking for a way to weasle the mustang into superiority. It's an awesome car, but there is always going to be something better. Let it be what it is.

I would love to see the new mustang beat the WS6.
Considering MMFF took the Hertz Shelby up against an Auto WS6 and got smoked.

Rebel73

I agree that the 0-60 times attained by most pro drivers will rarely be matched by the average driver. HOWEVER, they are a decent gauge of a car's potential. If the Mustang times were attained by pros, and the SRT-4 were attained by amateurs then it would be an unfair comparison. However, that's not the case. And on the street, it would be amateur vs. amateur (most likely), so the comparison still applies.

Now, I'm not arguing that the cars can't be made very quick without putting a little money into 'em, maybe even more cheaply than a Mustang GT out the door. But seriously, I can probably stuff a monster V8 into a Pinto and run 10s! SO WHAT? It's still ugly and will NEVER match the Mustang's overall appeal. I'd rather spend a little more money on a car that has the perfect blend of heritage, style, and performance, and doesn't look like I took my momma's Neon and souped it up.

Besides, the aftermarket has us well covered on the performance side of things.
Thank you, Mr. Whipple!

Knight

because different drivers are more or less skilled then another. If the WS6 was running 14 flat like i said then the srt4 beating it would not be an accomplishment since the average decent driven WS6 can do mid 13's.

so you are telling me that the 05+ mustangs on average are slower then 14sec in the 1/4 mile?

kevinb120

I think most magazine 0-60 times are easily beat, especially with cars that require finessing the shifts(as opposed to a BMW bomber auto with electronic everything). They only mess around with the car for a few hours. A lot of of the 'pro' drivers a are 'pro' only because they get paid to work for an auto magazine. MM&FF trounces all the mainstream Mustang tests everythime. They were 1 sec faster with the GT-500 then C&D in the 1/4. If it regards a Mustang, I only believe their numbers.

jarradasay

No, i'm tellin you your friend sucks at driving. Ive driving an AT 97 Trans Am non WS6 to 13.5 stock, not even a CAI, so if he's runnin 14's he sucks. I'm also tellin you that most of the 05's will probably see 14's because most guys/gals can hook up quick enough to see 13's. Again many of us on this site are the exception as we frequent the track.

Enfynet

I can't see an SRT4 stage anything beating the S197 out of the hole... Even stock they have phenominal weight transfer... Now, a 60-100 run might be a different story.

Knight

woohoo you finally got it

one car beating another doesn't mean anything. its all about beating the clock.

AnotherMustangMan

Yeah, because we all know a 1/4 mile time from one track on one day is directly comparable to a 1/4 time from another track on another day...oh wait...it isnt. Oh wait, one car beating another means EVERYTHING. Don't be an idiot, you're smarter than that. And yeah, SRT-4s are fast as they are ugly.

kevinb120

If they were as fast as they were ugly, they'd be in the 6's and top out over 275mph

Hollywood_North GT

GtStallion51

Here are my two cents on this comparison between a mustang and the 335i ... having owned two previous mustangs (02 & 05) and now driving the 335i ... I can say from a straight line performance stand point (stock vs stock) it would be a drivers race. I've always been a die hard mustang fan and thought I'd never buy a bmw, But this "equal" performance was the main thing that convinced me to trade in and buy the bmw. And YES, granted the 335i is roughly 10 to15+k more than a stock GT, a stock GT doesn't have anywhere near the technology stuff built in. So if you take out the all the "luxury" stuff then you would basically have bmw's version of a Mustang. As for non straight line performance, I loved my mustang and would take it back if I could, but the bmw out handles the S197 in everyway. On the other hand, while I love this new bmw, no amount of luxury can replace the rumble of the V8 in the Mustang

kevinb120

The new 335 is the only BMW I like anymore. The bangle styling is acceptable on it and the new M3 is so rediculously expensive. The new 335 does just about everything the old M3 did for less money. Its the best bang for the buck from the automaker. Nice sled

Hollywood_North GT

I think you summed it up best here >> "And YES, granted the 335i is roughly 10 to15+k more than a stock GT..."

That's a big whack of money.

I think we all know Ford HAS the chops to build a fully competitive world class car - the new Euro Mondeo and the Ford GT supercar prove that - but by-and-large, Ford's target market is different from BMWs; it's the common man, as opposed to the more affluent professional.

I have to laugh when I see 3-Series Bimmers on the road here. Often its 325s being driven by narcissistic social climbers who want the world to know that they've "arrived" or are "arriving" (and are in debt up to their eyeballs). The drivers of the 5 and 7-Series cars I have more respect for, because usually they can more legitimately afford cars outright at that price point.

cfr865

I smoked a ws6 without a problem !!!!!!!!!!!! LOL, If your blown 99% of the daily driven cars are no problem.

Rebel73

And I smoked a new M3 this last weekend, so I think we got it covered

clockworks

Well we're not talking about the other 999 other cars that aren't sports cars. Face it, when talking about "sports cars", the Mustang is at the bottom of the totem pole. ...but who cares, it's one of the best bangs for your buck!!

The Mustang is definitely a tuner's car... and if you're into that, great, slap a turbo on it and dominate most cars on the road. ..but if you're into keep your warranty... then the Mustang leaves A LOT to be desired, both in the straights and in the twisties.

Hollywood_North GT

Face "what" exactly? First of all, the Mustang is not a sports car. It's a pony/muscle/GT car. Last I checked, it's in a category of one. Granted, that will change when Camaro and Challenger arrive.

So what exactly are you comparing it to? And how many cars in its price point can hit 60 in five seconds? Fact is, you gotta take a signifcant leap in price to find a car that can equal it...never mind best it. A 350Z, for example, is significantly more expensive...and still slower.