The hp/tq curve is pretty darn close to that of a Mach 1. (please note the 'X' axis (RPMs) are not to scale in the two graphs)

See here. 05 Curve from the article.

 

03 Mach 1 curve.

 

Is the Mach an auto or manual?

 

Well, I convert the one from the 05 GT Auto to Manual using a 18% drivetrain loss for the auto and 15% for the manual, then I plotted it against the Mach 1 and the result was the 05 GT had more HP and TQ , but the Mach 1 revs higher during shifting the Mach 1 stays closer to the power band, so the Mach has the advantage.

It would be nice to see an SE with a higher reving 3-valve 4.6l and less weight.

 

5-spd manual,

03 Mach 1 dyno Reference

 

Looks to me like the biggest difference is the Mach 1 revs to 6500 RPM while the 3V GT red-lines @ 6,200 RPM.

I would have liked to see the '05 GT curve go all the way down to 2,000 RPM though. How much torque it has from 2,000 to 4,000 is pretty important as that's where the engine spends most of its time. The Mach 1 has a great torque curve, 240 RW lb. ft all the way down @ 2500 RPM. No wonder the Mach 1s are so fast.

 

One more. Mind you, this not scientific in ANY way, but I simply did the best I could at getting the numbers off the two charts for an overlay of the two. The dots are actual data ponts, and the lines are polynomial trendlines. It appears the mach 1 is stronger on the low end, and the GT will be stronger on the higher end.

 

So which vanity plate should I go with guys?



or

 

The Mach 1 is manual, the 05 GT data is for auto, did you tried to convert the 05 GT data to the equivalent for Manual?

 

1st one.

and i also understand from another thread that you are debating whether to get an auto or a manual.


psst.....manual....cough

Its not a true GTO killer if its not a manual. Sure, the numbers yes, but fun, no.

 

watch carefully, the graph is starting at 4000rpm [/b][/quote]
I was well aware of that...:notnice:

I guess after seeing plenty of flatter torque curves, you fall in love

 

Yes sir :usa:, I have stood firm and have not changed my order - manual tranny all the way :drive:

I've decided that I want this car for it's performance - and if I didn't, I should have bought something like Solara :R: instead.

 

The was no F-body in the 80's. F-body refers to the 93+ Camaro/Firebird chasis. In the 94 up range base model Z28's could be purchased for a little less than a GT Mustang.

In 1993 with the new F-body and old stang, there was a big difference. I bought my 1993 LX for $14,400 with tax, title, and license. A 93 Camaro with limited options was around $18,500 without TTL.

The new Mustang in 1994+ was equal or a little more than the Z28, but cheaper than the firechicken. The only problem was a Cobra was the only thing that could hang with a 93+ F-Body.

 

Oh yea

 

The graphs are great but for a real comparison you need to use the same dyno same day same tester

 

I can't put GTO killer on my license plate, because then I would be killing myself?

Should be a good matchup between the 05 stang and the 05 gto, I suspect that MM&FF and HPP will get the same results as the 04 Mach 1 and the 04 GTO, about even, depending on the driver.

Its great to have so many options to choose from. I'm only sorry that Chrysler decided to put the Charger name on a 4 door.

 

For my part, I think it's a tragedy the great muscle names of the past are being dragged through the mud to sell so-so to downright poor cars. I'd love it if the GTO was recognisably a GTO (not necessarily retro), and the engineers put as much thought into it as Ford does with the Stang. Same with the Charger.

 

Oh definitely. It just goes to show though how close the numbers are. I'm sure there will be cars dynoed side by side in coming months. Can't wait to see the numbers.

 

I always hated mathematics at school, but these numbers i like so much, that it makes me wanna go back to school again...

 

Where can I get Motor Trend? I've tried Wal Mart, Wal Greens, Pick N Save .. all of them don't have it.