what's the R&P for the 05? If it's 3.55, then look for numbers similar to the Mach1!

 

I think the MT estimate was actually 5.2

 

Yup, it has 3:55's.

 

I've heard 5.2, but that's 0.1 and 0.2 faster than the GTO and WRX.

Good enough for me......I might as well contact a chiropractor, because I'm gonna have serious neck damage.

Remember you save 5-9K when you buy a Mustang over a GTO.....can anyone say 18's and mods with the extra cash.

 

I'm guessin' 0-60 in 5 seconds. Of course, all we can do is guess. Even if it's 5.5, which I don't see it being more than that... that's plenty for me.

 

http://www.stealth316.com/2-calc-hp-et-mph.htm

Has an excellent formula for determining 1/4 mile times if horsepower at the crankshaft and vehicle weight are known. Formula has been kicking around since the 1960s with improvements.

Near the bottom of the link, after the graphs there are boxes for inputing the data.
2005 weighs 3475lbs? and 320 crankshaft horsepower? I will let those interested give it a whirl

 

4.10s & stickys high 12's

 

my guess for the GT, 0-60 around 5.5ish and 1/4 around 13

 

Okay, I can't resist. GT Has 295 at the rear wheel (hey I'm optimistic).
Weight is 100-150# heavier. Weight distribution is significantly better. 2/3 of this equals more traction.
SO SWAG (scientific wild a** guess)

Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords get a

5.0 to 60
13.0 @ 106 in the 1/4.

 

hey i dont care what it runs. atleast we still have a pont car.............wonder what the 0-60 is on the 05 Camaro????? my guess is 6.0 as in feet deep! HAHA we should start a poll what should be the next most retarded thread to start.............Brad how about some help???

 

How large will the ashtray be?? Any guesses? [/b][/quote]
When I bought my 2001 cavalier, I was about 3 miles from the dealer before I realized that it didn't come with an ashtray.

 

So now we're gonna start the Camaro banging? Wait until '08 when the Camaro DOES return, LoL, we're gonna have some good 'ol rivalries brewin' all over again. The Revolution is on.
As for the numbers...I'll go ahead and break it down realistically:
0-60 in 5.2-5.5
1/4 anywhere from 14.0 (auto) to as quick as a 13.3 (standard with skillful driver)
I wouldn't expect anything much better than that from Ford.

 

I'd be disappointed if the 1/4 was above 13.6-13.7sec.

I really think this thing should be putting down 13.5sec consistantly with bests of 13.1sec or so.

Basically, I really want to see Mach 1 time slips.

 

How old will you be when you call it quits with Mustang and go for Buick?

Length of time before your first premium gas fill up.

How many oreos will fit in the spot where the lighter is?


Just some suggestions.

 

i say go with the lighter question...ill take 4 oreos alex! haha but no im not camaro bashing. i just couldnt help myself. i wish GM had their act together and mad those guys and girls a good car so that they didnt go out of production

 

Well the typical GT drivetrain abosrbs about 35hp IIRC. I dunno if the new tremec tranny is more effiecent than the old T-5, but I'm guessing that the 8.8 should be about the same as the old diffs. So if Fords avg power estimates are good and the car weighs 3450. Less'se? Lets average all this stuff out here

265rwhp + 3450 lbs + 170 lbs driver + 1/4 tank (34 lbs)=3654 lbs

Y'know I dunno?, one calculator I checked had it barely cracking the 13's. but heck my 02 with my 300 pound butt and a 1/4 tank on a good night can run 14 flat and thats with crappy driving skills.

 

Which calculator uses rear wheel horsepower? The one I posted is crankshaft horsepower. Using 3675lbs as weight with driver, 13.80 if the engine has 320hp or 13.60 if the engine has 340hp. This figure does sound reasonable for a vehicle which will be mass marketed to folks who would/will not drive a V6 and wish for more pep but may not have the inclination to drive an extremely quick street car. A low 13 second car truly is a horrifyingly fast drive if one is not experienced. I mean Mustang GTs have historically been reasonably quick cars but not super fast. At least not off the showroom floor. (O.K. there were some 428 equipped GTs but that was in the 1960s) Of course quicker times would be available if the engine were tuned and traction conditions are optimal.

How much more does the 2005 GT weight compared to a 2003-04 Mach 1? Did not some recent magazine in a GTO vs Mach 1 contest generate 290rwhp with one? Would that be about 330hp at the crankshaft?

 

It weighs about the same as a Mach 1. Most Mach 1's don't produce 290rwhp. 275rwhp is more accurate, maybe 280rwhp. This translates to 325-330hp at the crank assuming 15% losses.

 

Stan Weiss


This site has lots of good fomulas for figuring out just about anything you want with respect to horsepower.

Now if MM&FF claim of "rumor of 290-295" at the wheels is true, that means it should have about 345 hp at the crank. Than with perfect traction, a good driver, and 3650# 12.76@107 should be possible.

Test the formulas against known cars with slicks, you will find that they come very close. I've found on the three tracks in my area, with 5.0 mustangs (fox bdys) in the 300-400 crank hp range, slicks are worth on average of .4 to .7 in the 1/4 over generic radials.

I think this new GT is going to surprise some people.

 

Anyone remember the guy that clicked off a 12.9x run in a bone stock Mach 1 a while back? Now granted he was very skilled and drove that heck out of it, but he did do it. With the right driver in the right conditions, I say that the new GT could break into the 12's. I imagine most people will run 13.3-13.5.